Investigating Students’ Acceptance of a Statistics Learning Platform Using Technology Acceptance Model

Abstract

The study aims at investigating university students’ acceptance of a statistics learning platform to support the learning of statistics in a blended learning context. Three kinds of digital resources, which are simulations, online videos, and online quizzes, were provided on the platform. Premised on the technology acceptance model, we adopted a revised model consisting of four external factors (self-efficacy, facilitating conditions, subjective norm, and anxiety) that may influence students’ perceptions and acceptance of the platform. A mixed research method was used. A total of 102 participants were involved in this study. Data collection includes questionnaires survey, individual interviews, and focus group discussions. The findings show that students’ intention to use the platform is affected by their attitude toward the platform, which is significantly influenced by perceived usefulness. Further suggestions regarding the design and implementation of a learning platform are provided based on the observations and results of the study. This preliminary study provides valuable insights into our further refinement of the platform and development of a learning analytics platform in the future for better learning of students in statistics.

Keywords

statistics learning platform statistics education digital resources technological acceptance model blended learning approach

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ajzen

(1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50(2): 179–211.

Ajzen

Fishbein

(1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hill.

Baharun

Porter

(2009) Teaching statistics using a blended approach: Integrating technology-based resources. In: Atkinson

R. J.

McBeath

(eds) Same places, different spaces. Proceedings of the ascilite Auckland 2009, Auckland, New Zealand: The University of Auckland, Auckland University of Technology, and Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ascilite), pp. 40–48.

Ben-Zvi

(2000) Toward understanding the role of technological tools in statistical learning. Mathematical Thinking and Learning 2(1–2): 127–155.

Bryman

(2006) Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research 6(1): 97–113.

Chance, B., Ben-Zvi, D., Garfield, J., & Medina, E. (2007). The role of technology in improving student learning of statistics. Technology Innovations in Statistics Education, 1(1). Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/8sd2t4rr#page-1.

Chance

Rossman

(2006) Using simulation to teach and learn statistics. In: Rossman

Chance

(eds) Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Teaching Statistics, Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute, pp. 1–6.

Chang

S. C.

Tung

F. C.

(2008) An empirical investigation of students’ behavioural intentions to use the online learning course websites. British Journal of Educational Technology 39(1): 71–83.

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.

10.

Compeau

Higgins

C. A.

Huff

(1999) Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: A longitudinal study. MIS Quarterly 23(2): 145–158.

11.

Compeau

D. R.

Higgins

C. A.

(1995) Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly 19(2): 189–211.

12.

Creswell

(2013) Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

13.

Davis

F. D.

(1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3): 319–340.

14.

Davis

F. D.

(1993) User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 38(3): 475–487.

15.

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): 982–1003.

16.

Escobar-Rodriguez

Monge-Lozano

(2012) The acceptance of Moodle technology by business administration students. Computers & Education 58(4): 1085–1093.

17.

Ferguson

(2012) Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning 4(5–6): 304–317.

18.

Fishbein

Ajzen

(1975) Belief, attitudes, intention, and behavior. An introduction to theory and research, Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

19.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

(1981) Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research 18(3): 382–388.

20.

Garrison

D. R.

Vaughan

N. D.

(2008) Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

21.

Gong

(2004) An enhanced technology acceptance model for web-based learning. Journal of Information Systems Education 15(4): 365–374.

22.

González-Gómez

Jeong

J. S.

Rodríguez

D. A.

(2016) Performance and perception in the flipped learning model: An initial approach to evaluate the effectiveness of a new teaching methodology in a general science classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology 25(3): 450–459.

23.

Greene

J. C.

Caracelli

V. J.

Graham

W. F.

(1989) Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11(3): 255–274.

24.

Groves

M. M.

Zemel

P. C.

(2000) Instructional technology adoption in higher education: An action research case study. International Journal of Instructional Media 27(1): 57–65.

25.

Hair

J. F.

Black

W. C.

Babin

B. J.

Anderson

R. E.

Tatham

R. L.

(2010) Multivariate data analysis Vol. 7: Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

26.

Hsieh

H. F.

Shannon

S. E.

(2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15(9): 1277–1288.

27.

Kline

R. B.

(2005) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 4th ed. New York, NY: Guilford publications.

28.

Kong

S. C.

Song

(2015) An experience of personalized learning hub initiative embedding BYOD for reflective engagement in higher education. Computers & Education 88: 227–240.

29.

Lai

Wang

Lei

(2012) What factors predict undergraduate students' use of technology for learning? A case from Hong Kong. Computers & Education 59(2): 569–579.

30.

Lai

Williams

(2016) Students’ perceptions of technology-enhanced pedagogy in their statistics learning. In: Chamblee

Langub

(eds) Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2016, Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), pp. 2137–2143.

31.

Lane

D. M.

(1999) The rice virtual lab in statistics. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 31: 24–33.

32.

Lane

D. M.

Scott

D. W.

(2000) Simulations, case studies, and an online text: A web-based resource for teaching statistics. Metrika, Special Issue on Interactive Statistics 51: 67–90.

33.

Lee

Y. H.

Hsieh

Y. C.

Chen

Y. H.

(2013) An investigation of employees' use of e-learning systems: Applying the technology acceptance model. Behaviour & Information Technology 32(2): 173–189.

34.

Martins

L. L.

Kellermanns

F. W.

(2004) A model of business school students' acceptance of a web-based course management system. Academy of Management Learning & Education 3(1): 7–26.

35.

Mayer

R. E.

(2004) Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist 59: 14.

36.

McGill

T. J.

Klobas

J. E.

(2009) A task–technology fit view of learning management system impact. Computers & Education 52(2): 496–508.

37.

Meletiou-Mavrotheris

(2003) Technological tools in the introductory statistics classroom: Effects on student understanding of inferential statistics. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning 8(3): 265–297.

38.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

A. M.

Saldana

(2013) Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Incorporated.

39.

Mirani

King

W. R.

(1994) Impacts of end-user and information center characteristics on end-user computing support. Journal of Management Information Systems 11(1): 141–166.

40.

Moran-Ellis

Alexander

V. D.

Cronin

Dickinson

Fielding

Sleney

Thomas

(2006) Triangulation and integration: Processes, claims and implications. Qualitative Research 6(1): 45–59.

41.

Mun

Y. Y.

Hwang

(2003) Predicting the use of web-based information systems: Self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59(4): 431–449.

42.

Neumann, D. L., Hood, M., & Neumann, M. M. (2008). Strategies that enhance student engagement during the teaching of statistics in psychology programs. In Proceedings of 43rd APS Conference, 234–238, Melbourne, Australian Psychological Society.

43.

Neumann

D. L.

Neumann

M. M.

Hood

(2011) Evaluating computer-based simulations, multimedia and animations that help integrate blended learning with lectures in first year statistics. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 27(2): 274–289.

44.

Ngai

E. W.

Poon

J. K. L.

Chan

Y. H. C.

(2007) Empirical examination of the adoption of WebCT using TAM. Computers & Education 48(2): 250–267.

45.

Ong

C. S.

Lai

J. Y.

Wang

Y. S.

(2004) Factors affecting engineers’ acceptance of asynchronous e-learning systems in high-tech companies. Information & Management 41(6): 795–804.

46.

Onwuegbuzie

A. J.

Wilson

V. A.

(2003) Statistics anxiety: Nature, etiology, antecedents, effects and treatments-a comprehensive review of the literature. Teaching in Higher Education 8(2): 195–209.

47.

Pan

Tang

(2004) Examining the effectiveness of innovative instructional methods on reducing statistics anxiety for graduate students in the social sciences. Journal of Instructional Psychology 31(2): 149–159.

48.

Park

S. Y.

(2009) An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding university students' behavioral intention to use e-learning. Educational Technology & Society 12(3): 150–162.

49.

Poelmans

Wessa

(2015) A constructivist approach in a blended e-learning environment for statistics. Interactive Learning Environments 23(3): 385–401.

50.

R Core Team. (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer Software]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/.

51.

Ros

Hernández

Caminero

Robles

Barbero

Maciá

Holgado

F. P.

(2015) On the use of extended TAM to assess students' acceptance and intent to use third-generation learning management systems. British Journal of Educational Technology 46(6): 1250–1271.

52.

Schepers

Wetzels

(2007) A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & Management 44(1): 90–103.

53.

Singh

(2003) Building effective blended learning programs. Educational Technology 43(6): 51–54.

54.

Sumner

Hostetler

(1999) Factors influencing the adoption of technology in teaching. The Journal of Computer Information Systems 40(1): 81–87.

55.

Tarhini

Hone

Liu

Tarhini

(2016) Examining the moderating effect of individual-level cultural values on users’ acceptance of E-learning in developing countries: A structural equation modeling of an extended technology acceptance model. Interactive Learning Environments. 1–23. DOI: 10.1080/10494820.2015.1122635.

56.

Teo

(2009) Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education 52(2): 302–312.

57.

Teo

Zhou

(2014) Explaining the intention to use technology among university students: A structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Computing in Higher education 26(2): 124–142.

58.

Thompson

R. L.

Higgins

C. A.

Howell

J. M.

(1991) Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly 15(1): 125–143.

59.

van Raaij

E. M.

Schepers

J. J.

(2008) The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers & Education 50(3): 838–852.

60.

Venkatesh

Davis

F. D.

(2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science 46(2): 186–204.

61.

Venkatesh

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.