Implementation of ICT policy (blended learning approach): investigating factors of behavioural intention and use behaviour

Wong, Kung Teck

QR Code Link :
Type :	article
Subject :	L Education (General)
Main Author :	Wong, Kung Teck
Additional Authors :	Mohd Azli Yeop Mohd Faiz Mohd Yaakob Yahya Don Farah Mohamad Zain
Title :	Implementation of ICT policy (blended learning approach): investigating factors of behavioural intention and use behaviour

Place of Production :	Tanjong Malim
Publisher :	Fakulti Pembangunan Manusia
Year of Publication :	2019
Corporate Name :	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of ICT policies in investigating o Behavioral Intention (BI) and Use Behavior (UB) factors by employing experience and workload of teachers as moderator. The identified factors were Use Expectancy (UE), Social Influence (SI), Facilitating Conditions (FC) and Teacher Efficacy (TE). Experience and workload are defined as moderator variables, and integrated into the study model. The data were collected through a questionnaire among 720 teachers in Malaysia. The findings showed UE, SI, FC, and TE were significant factors affecting BI and UB. The findings of empirical analysis also revealed that experience factors moderate the relationship between FC and UB. Meanwhile, workload factors moderate (1) UE and BI relationships, and (2) TE and BI relationships. This study also provided positive implications for efforts to promote learning practices using a blended learning approach through constructive guidance to policymakers and planning for professional development of teaching.

References

1. AbdulWahab, L. (2012). A modification of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) from users’ perspectives of Telecentre in Nigeria. Universiti Utara Malaysia. Retrieved from http://etd.uum.edu.my/3379/.

2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. In Orgnizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50 (p. 179–211). Academic Press, Inc. http://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.

3. Alghanmi, S. (2014). Investigating the interpersonal and contextual factors govern Saudi lecturers’ motivation in creating innovative Blended learning environment that web 2.0-based. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(3), 96–106. http://www.tojet.net/articles/v13i3/13311.pdf.

4. Alharbi, S., & Drew, S. (2014). Using the technology acceptance model in understanding academics’ behavioural intention to use learning management systems. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 5(1), 143–155. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.428.9465&rep=rep1&type=pdf

5. Attuquayefio, S. N., & Addo, H. (2014). Using the UTAUT model to analyze students ’ ICT adoption. Journal of Technology, 10(3), 75–86. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1059042.pdf.

6. Banas, J. R., & York, C. S. (2014). Authentic learning exercises as a means to influence preservice teachers’ technology integration self-efficacy and intentions to integrate technology. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(6), 728–746. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijicte.2014070105.

7. Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. The American psychologist, 44(9), 1175–1184. http://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.44.9.1175.

8. Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2012). Factors influencing teachers’ adoption and integration of information and communication technology into teaching: a review of the literature. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 8(1), 136–155. http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu //viewarticle.php?id=1361.

9. Cimermanová, I. (2013). Teacher training in the virtual learning environment. International Journal of Arts and Commerce, 2(10), 1–8.

10. 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). http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982.

11. Dawson, J. F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(1), 1–19. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9308-7.

12. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

13. Fu, J. (2013). ICT in education: A critical literature review and its implications. International Journal of Education and Development using information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT), 9(1), 112–125. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.357.6432.

14. Gaskin, J. (2016). Multi-group analysis. Retrieved from http://youtube.com/Gaskination.

15. Hair, J. F., Babin, B. J., & Krey, N. (2017). Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modeling in the Journal of Advertising: Review and Recommendations. Journal of Advertising, 46(1), 163–177. http://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2017.1281777.

16. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education Limited (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

17. Hamzah, M. I., Embi, M. A., & Ismail, A. (2010). ICT and diversity in learners’ attitude on smart school initiative. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7(C), 728–737. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.099.

18.Hur, W.-M., Kim, H., & Kim, W.-M. (2014). The moderating roles of gender and age in tablet computer adoption. Cyberpsychology, behavior and social networking, 17(1), 33–39. http://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0435.

19. Ibrahim, M., AhmadShidki, M. Y., WanSalihin Wong, A., & Fahmi, A. R. (2015). Factors contributing pre-school trainees teachers adoption of virtual learning environment: Malaysian evidence. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 14(2), 73–79. Retrieved from http://www.tojet.net/articles/v14i2/14210.pdf.

20. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd. Ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

21. Kulviwat, S., Bruner, G. C., & Neelankavil, J. P. (2014). Self-efficacy as an antecedent of cognition and affect in technology acceptance. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 31(3), 190–199. http://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2.

22. Lee, L.-T., & Hung, J. C. (2015). Effects of blended e-learning: A case study in higher education tax learning setting. Human-centric Computing and Information Sciences, 5(1), 13. http://doi.org/10.1186/s13673-015-0024-3.

23. Lim, D. H., Morris, M. L., & Kupritz, V. W. (2007). Online vs. Blended Learning: Differences in instructional outcomes and learner satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11, 27–42. http://doi.org/184.168.109.199.

24. Lim, K., & Hwa, M. (2015). A case study of the experiences of instructors and students in a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) with different cultural backgrounds. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(4), 613–626. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-015-9400-y.

25. Masitah, M. Y., Azizi, M., Ahamad Makmom, A., Bahaman, A. S., Ramli, B., & Noriati, A. R. (2013). Faktor- faktor yang mempengaruhi efikasi kendiri guru sekolah menengah di Malaysia dalam pelaksanaan pendidikan alam sekitar. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 28, 131–153.

26. Mazur, A. D., Brown, B., & Jacobsen, M. (2015). Learning designs using flipped classroom instruction. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 41(2), 1–26. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1720057846?accountid=8194.

27. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2010). Policy on ICT in Education Malaysia. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education.

28. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2012a). Interim Strategic Plan 2011-2020. Putrajaya, Malaysia.

29. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2012b). Exercutive Summary Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025 (Preschool to Post-Secondary Education). Putrajaya, Malaysia.

30. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2013). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013 - 2025. Putrajaya, Malaysia. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.my/userfiles/file/PPP/PreliminaryBlueprintExecSummary-BM.pdf.

31. MohdAzli, Y., Wong, K. T., & Noraini, M. N. (2016). Blended learning in selected journals: A content analysis using the Complex Adaptive Blended learning Systems. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 13(10), 47–58. Retrieved from http://itdl.org/Journal/Oct_16/Oct16.pdf#page=52.

32. MohdAzli, Y., Wong, K. T., Noraini, M. N., & Mahizer, H. (2016). Pembelajaran teradun: Satu pengenalan. Dalam trend dan isu: Pengajaran dan pembelajaran (p 1–16). Tanjong Malim: Penerbit FPPM, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.

33. Muraina, I. D. (2015). The factors that contribute to the continuous usage of broadband technologies among youth in rural areas: A case of northern region of Malaysia. (PhD Thesis) Universiti Utara Malaysia.

34. Norazilawati, A., Noraini, M. N., Nik Azmah, N. Y., & Rosnidar, M. (2013). Aplikasi persekitaran pengajaran maya (Frog VLE) dalam kalangan guru sains. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains dan Matematik, 3(2), 63–76.

35. SaifulAfzan, B., Lazim, A., Ali, A., & Yusoff, H. (2014). Pemodelan penerimaan pelajar terhadap persekitaran pembelajaran maya (VLE). Journal of Business and Social Development, 2(2), 36–47.

36. Saltson, E., & Sharon, N. (2015). The mediating and moderating effects of motivation in the relationship between perceived organizational support and employee job performance. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 3(7), 654–667. Retrieved from http://ijecm.co.uk/.

37. SeriRahayu, H. (2011). Teachers’ beliefs and use of ICTs in malaysian smart schools: A casestudy. Dalam Changing Demands, Changing Directions. Proceedings ascilite Hobart 2011 (hal.522–525). Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/hobart11/downloads/papers/Hamid-poster.pdf.

38. SitiNazuar, S. (2014). Barriers influencing teacher ’s technology integration in their teaching practice. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 8(23), 352–357.

39. Songkram, N. (2015). E-learning system in virtual learning environment to develop creative thinking for learners in higher education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 674–679. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.600.

40. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson Education. Inc.

41. Tarhini, A., Hone, K., Liu, X., & Tarhini, T. (2017). 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, 25(3), 306–328. http://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1122635.

42. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176. http://doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.2.144.

43. Teo, T., Fan, X., & Du, J. (2015). Technology acceptance among pre-service teachers: Doesgender matter?? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(3), 235–251. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.14742/ajet.v0i0.1672.

44. Termit, K., & Noorma, H. (2015). Teachers’ readiness to utilize Frog VLE: A case study of a Malaysian secondary school. British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science, 5(1), 20–29. http://doi.org/10.9734/BJESBS/2015/11965.

45. The JISC infoNet Service. (2006). Effective use of VLEs: Introduction to VLEs. Retrieved from http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/InfoKits/effective-use-of-VLEs/intro-toVLEs/printable_version.pdf.

46. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. . (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 124–143. http://doi.org/10.2307/249443.

47. Touray, A., & Salminen, A. (2013). The impact of moderating factors on behavioral intention towards internet: A transnational perspective. International Journal of Computer and Information Technology, 2(6), 1035–1041. Retrieved from www.ijcit.com.

48. Vatanartiran, S., & Karadeniz, S. (2015). A needs analysis for technology integration plan: Challenges and needs of teachers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 6(3), 206–220. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezpustaka.upsi.edu.my/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=02839cfb7b1d-47cb-871a-361f9d93bc8f@sessionmgr4002&vid=1&hid=4204.

49. 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. http://doi.org/10.2307/30036540.

50. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2002388.

51. WanZah, W. A., Hajar, M. N., Azimi, H., & Hayati, A. (2009). The conditions and level of ICT integration in Malaysian Smart Schools. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 5(2), 21–31. Retrieved from http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu//viewarticle.php?id=618&layout=html.

52. Wong, K. T., Rosma, O., Goh, P. S. C., & Mohd Khairezan, R. (2013). Understanding student teachers’ behavioural intention to use technology: Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) validation and testing. International Journal of Instruction, 6(1), 89–105. Retrieved from http://www.e-iji.net/dosyalar/iji_2013_1_6.pdf.

53. Zaharah, H., Saedah, S., Ghazali, D., & Nur Hasbuna, M. S. (2015). Kajian model Blended learning dalam jurnal terpilih: Satu analisa kandungan. Jurnal Kurikulum & Pengajaran Asia Pasifik, 3(1), 20–31. Retrieved from juku.um.edu.my.

54. Zhang, M., Liu, Y., Yan, W., & Zhang, Y. (2016). Users’ continuance intention of virtual learning community services: The moderating role of usage experience. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–19. http://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1172242.

This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials.
You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research.

Back to previous page