UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris |
| The purpose of the study is to identify factors that influence behavioral intention (BI) of teachers in the developing of the MoblieHeutagogical (m-Heutagogical) Acceptance and Use Model. Many recent surges in published studies have revealed that m-Heutagogy has significant impacts on Edu. 4.0. However, the integrations seem to face a low level of its use among educators in the Malaysia setting. Methodologically, the study used the quantitative approach. A selfadministered survey was conducted involving 246 teachers, who were randomly selected from several teacher institutions and universities, where 58.1% (143) of the respondents were pre-service teachers, and 41.9% (103) were practicing teachers. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) with the use of IBM SPSS Amos was performed to determine the estimates of the parameters of the study model. The study showed that the proposed model fulfilled the requirements of the predetermined fit index, showing Use Expectancy (UE), Facilitating Condition (FC), Social Influence (SI), and Mobile Teacher Efficacy (MTE) were significant factors of behavioral intention (BI). Overall, the analysis of SEM provided strong evidence that the variables of the study contributed to 69.8% of the variances in BI. Also, the findings showed that MTE influenced Behavioural Intention (BI) in the use of mobile heutagogy more strongly for practicing teachers than for pre-service teachers. The implication, this study is the proposed conceptual model can serve as a constructive guideline to help the stakeholders, notably the policymaker, professional development for teachers and to facilitate the implementation of mobile heutagogical practices. |
| References |
Abu Al-Aish, A., & Love, S. (2013). Factors influencing students' acceptance of Mlearning: An investigation in higher education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(5), 82–107. doi:10.19173/irrodlv14i5.1631 Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211. Amanat 2018 Menteri Pendidikan Tinggi. (2018). Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi. Amir, R., Bunawan, H., & Yahaya, M. F. (2018). Cabaran mahasiswa dan kolej kediaman mendepani Revolusi Industri 4.0 [Student and residential college challenges facing the Industrial Revolution 4.0]. Governans, Institusi & Pengurusan Kewangan: Prosiding Konvensyen Kepengetuaan dan Felo Penghuni Kolej Kediaman Universiti Awam Kebangsaan 2018, 3, 24-29. Attuquayefio, S., & Addo, H. (2014). Using the UTAUT model to analyze students' ICT adoption. The International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 10(3), 75-86. Banerjee, P. (2019). Heautagogy: A self-determined approach enhances constructivism. International Journal of Scientific Research and Review, 7(6), 223-230 Blaschke, L. M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A Review of heutagogical practice and self-determined learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 13(1), 56-71. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1076 Blaschke, L. M., & Hase, S. (2016). Heutagogy: A holistic framework for creating 21st century self-determined learners. In The Future of Ubiquitous Learning: Learning Designs for Emerging Pedagogies (pp. 25-40). Berlin, Heidelberg: Spring Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-47724-3-2 Blaschke, L. M., & Hase, S. (2019). Heutagogy and digital media networks: Setting students on the path to lifelong learning. Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(1), 1-14. doi:10.24135/pjtel.v1i1.1 Cevik, Y. D., Daghan, G., Barin, S., & Savran, R. (2015). Examining information and communication technologies preservice teachers’ views on technology integration and their roles in this process. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 11(4), 1143-1166. doi:10.17244/eku.12644 Chacko, T. (2018). Emerging pedagogies for effective adult learning: From andragogy to heutagogy. Archives of Medicine and Health Sciences, 6(2), 278-283. doi:10.4103/amhs.amhs_141_18 Cimermanová, I. (2013). Teacher training in the virtual learning environment. International Journal of Arts and Commerce, 2(10), 1-8. 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) doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982 Fishbein, M. A., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. doi:10.2307/2065853 Green, R., & Schlairet, M. (2016). Moving toward heutagogical learning: Illuminating undergraduate nursing students' experiences in a flipped classroom. Nurse education today, 49, 122-128. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2016.11.016 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. doi:10.1080/00913367.2017.1281777 Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. ultiBASE In-Site. Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2007). Heutagogy: A child of complexity yheory. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 4(1), 111-118. doi:10.29173/cmplct8766 Hoque, K. E., Abdul Razak, A. Z., & Mosa, F. Z. (2012). ICT Utilization among school teachers and principals in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 1(4), 17-34. Jin, W., & Junio-Sabio, C. (2018). Potential use of mobile devices in selected public senior high schools in the city of Manila Philippines. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 17(4), 102-114. doi:10.26803/ijlter.17.4.7 Kamrozzaman, N. A., Badusah, J., & Wan Mohammad, W. M. R. (2019). Heutagogy approach: Effectiveness of M-learning for lifelong learning education/Pendekatan heutagogi: Keberkesanan M-pembelajaran untuk pendidikan sepanjang hayat. Sains Humanika, 11(3), 53-61. doi:10.11113/sh.v11n3.1496 Merandu, E. E., Makudza, F., & Ngwenya, S. N. (2019). Predicting students’ intention and actual use of E-learning using the technology acceptance model: A case from Zimbabwe. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 18(6), 110-127. doi:10.26803/ijlter.18.6.7 Nam, N. D., & Thao, T. T. P. (2015). An empirical research on the use of mobile phones to support students’ mathematics learning. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 12(1), 133-141. Narayan, V., Herrington, J., & Cochrane, T. (2019). Design principles for heutagogical learning: Implementing student-determined learning with mobile and social media tools. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(3), 86-101. doi:10.14742/ajet.3941 Nowak, B. M. (2019). The sense of self-efficacy of teachers working in special schools – A Research Communiqué. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 18(10), 161-174. doi:10.26803/ijlter.18.10.10 Prashanti, E., KS, K. K., Komattil, R., & Ismail, A. R. (2017). Heutagogy through Facebook for the millennial learners. MedEdPublish, 6. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. doi:10.1108/10748120110424816 Prensky, M. (2011). In the 21st-century university, let’s ban (paper) books. Chronicle of Higher Education. Sambandamurthi, A. (2015). Impact of integrating heutagogy into e-content gor tertiary learners. Pyrex Journals, 1(5), 52–56. Retrieved from http://www.pyrexjournals.org/pjerr Schumaker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2010). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Routledge. 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. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.600 Stratton, T. M. (2014). A case study of the integration of 21st century technology within the place-based, Expeditionary Learning Outward Bound (ELOB) approach to education. Instructional Technology Education Specialist Research Papers, 16, 1-59. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/edu-papers/16 Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson Education. Inc. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information systems research, 6(2), 144-176. Teo, T., Fan, X., & Du, J. (2015). Technology acceptance among pre-service teachers: Does gender matter? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(3), 235-251. doi:10.14742/ajet.1672 Vatanartiran, S., & Karadeniz, S. (2015). A needs analysis for technology integration plan: Challenges and needs of teachers. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 6(3), 206-220. Ventakesh, 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. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer Acceptance and Use of Information Technology: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178. Wong, K. T., Hwang, G. J., Goh, P. S. C., & Mohd Arif, S. K. (2018). Effects of blended learning pedagogical practices on students’ motivation and autonomy for the teaching of short stories in upper secondary English. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-14. doi:10.1080/10494820.2018.1542318 Wong, K. T., Teo, T., & Russo, S. (2013). Interactive whiteboard acceptance: Applicability of the UTAUT model to student teachers. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(1), 1-10. doi:10.1007/s40299-012-0001-9 Wong, K. T., Abdullah, N., & Abas, N. A. H. (2019). Blended learning pedagogical practices: The challenges to cultivate new ways of teaching in higher education institutions and universities. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 9(1), 4178-4184. doi:10.35940/ijeat.a1427.109119 Wong, K. T., Abdullah, N., & Goh, P. S. C. (2019). A cross examination of the intention to integrate MOOCs in teaching and learning: An application of multi-group invariance analysis. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 14(19), 106-116. doi:10.3991/ijet.v14i19.10642 Yeop, M. A., Mohd Yaakob, M. F., Wong, K. T., & Don, Y. (2019). Implementation of ICT policy (Blended Learning Approach): Investigating factors of behavioural intention and use behaviour. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1). doi:10.29333/iji.2019.12149a Yeop, M. A., Wong, K. T., & Goh, P. S. C. (2016). Blended learning: pedagogy, learning styles, and assessment activities in the classroom. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 33(11), 36-39. doi:10.21833/ijaas.2016.11.007 |
| 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. |