Predicting continued use of online teacher professional development and the influence of social presence and sociability

British Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 43, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 871-882

  Smith, Jo Ann ^a   Sivo, Stephen A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLASSROOM TEACHERS; CONTINUED USE; PERCEIVED EASE OF USE; PERCEIVED USEFULNESS; PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT; SOCIAL INTERACTIONS; SOCIAL PRESENCE; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT; TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE MODEL; USER PERCEPTIONS;

E-LEARNING; EDUCATION; PROFESSIONAL ASPECTS;

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS;

EID: 84867573246     PISSN: 00071013     EISSN: 14678535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01223.x     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Ajzen, I., &, Fishbein, M., (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
2. Bhattacherjee, A., (2001). An empirical analysis of the antecedents of electronic commerce service continuance. Decision Support Systems, 32, 201-214. DOI:10.1016/S0167-9236(01)00111-7.
3. Brint, S., (2006). Schools and societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge.
4. Brown, I., (2002). Individual and technological factors affecting perceived ease of use of web-based learning technologies in a developing country. Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Counties, 9, 5, 1-15.
5. Darling-Hammond, L., (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8, 1. Retrieved February 22, 2006, from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/392
6. Davis, F. D., (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-339.
7. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., &, Warshaw, P. R., (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982-1003.
8. Davis, F. D., &, Venkatesh, V., (2004). Toward preprototype user acceptance testing of new information systems: implications of software project management. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 51, 31-46.
9. Dede, C., (Ed.) (2006). Online professional development for teachers: emerging models and methods. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
10. Gao, Y., (2005). Applying the technology acceptance model (TAM) to educational hypermedia: a field study. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 14, 237-247.
11. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., &, Desimone, L., (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915-945.
12. Garrison, D. R., &, Anderson, T., (2003). E-Learning in the 21st century: a framework for research and practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
13. Gefen, D., Straub, D., &, Boudreau, M., (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 4, Article 7. Retrieved March 20, 2006, from http://aisel.aisnet.org/cais/vol4/iss1/7
14. Girod, M., &, Girod, G., (2006). Exploring the efficacy of the Cook school district simulation. Journal of Teacher Education, 57, 5, 481-498.
15. Gunawardena, C., &, Zittle, F., (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. The American Journal of Distance Education, 11, 8-26.
16. Guskey, R. T., (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
17. Hayashi, A., Chen, C., Ryan, T., &, Wu, J., (2004). The role of social presence and moderating role of computer self-efficacy in predicting the continuance usage of e-learning systems. Journal of Information Systems Education, 15, 139-154.
18. Holland, H., (2005). Teaching teachers: professional development to improve student achievement. Research Points, 3, 1-4. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. Retrieved March 20, 2006, from http://www.aera.net/uploadedFiles/Journals-and-Publications/Research-Points/ RPSummer05.pdf
19. Hsu, M. H., &, Chiu, C. M., (2004). Predicting electronic service continuance with a decomposed theory of planned behavior. Behavior & Information Technology, 23, 359-373.
20. Hu, L., &, Bentler, P. M., (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55.
21. Kim, S. S., &, Malhotra, N. K., (2005). Predicting system usage from intention and past use: scale issues in the predictors. Decision Sciences, 36, 187-196.
22. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P., Jochems, W., &, Van Buuren, H., (2004a). Determining sociability, social space, and social presence in synchronous collaborative groups. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 7, 155-172.
23. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P., Jochems, W., &, Van Buuren, H., (2004b). Measuring perceived quality of social space in distributed learning groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 607-632.
24. Lee, Y., Kozar, K., &, Larsen, K., (2003). The technology acceptance model: past, present, and future. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 12, 752-780.
25. Lissitz, R. W., &, Green, S. B., (1975). Effect of the number of scale points on reliability: a Monte Carlo approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 10-13.
26. Lowenthal, P. R., (2010). Social presence. In, S. Dasgupta, (Ed.), Social computing: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 129-136). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
27. Mathieson, K., (1991). Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research, 2, 173-191.
28. Moon, J., &, Kim, Y., (2001). Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information & Management, 38, 217-230.
29. 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, 795-804.
30. Pan, C., Gunter, G., Sivo, S., &, Cornell, R., (2005). End-user acceptance of a learning management system in two hybrid large-sized introductory undergraduate courses: a case study. Journal Educational Technology Systems, 33, 355-365.
31. Pearl, J., (2000). Causality: models, reasoning, and inference. New York: Oxford University Press.
32. Picciano, A. G., (2002). Beyond student perceptions: issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6, 1, 21-40.
33. Richardson, J., &, Swan, K., (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students' perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7, 1, 68-88.
34. Roca, J. C., Chiu, C. M., &, Martinez, F. J., (2006). Understanding e-learning continuance intention: an extension of the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64, 8, 683-696.
35. Schlager, M. S., &, Fusco, J., (2003). Teacher professional development, technology, and communities of practice: are we putting the cart before the horse? The Information Society, 19, 203-220.
36. Schlichte, J., Yssel, N., &, Merbler, J., (2005). Pathways to burnout: case studies in teacher isolation and alienation. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 50, 1, 35-40.
37. Short, J., Williams, E., &, Christie, B., (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London & New York: Wiley.
38. Sivo, S., Fan, V., Witta, E., &, Willse, J., (2006a). The search for 'optimal' cutoff properties: fit index criteria in structure equation modeling. The Journal of Experimental Education, 74, 267-288.
39. Sivo, S., Saunders, C., Chang, Q., &, Jiang, J. J., (2006b). How low should you go? Low response rates and the validity of inference in IS questionnaire research. Journal of Association for Information Systems, 7, 351-414.
40. Swan, B., Huh, J., Ramos, R., Barbato, S., &, Chen, C., (2007). Florida Online Reading Professional Development (FOR-PD) Phase V Evaluation Results of Surveys. Orlando, FL: University of Central Florida.
41. Venkatesh, V., &, Davis, F. D., (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46, 2, 186-204.
42. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G. B., &, Davis, F. D., (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425-478.
43. Wenglinsky, H. H., (2000). How teaching matters: bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
44. Whitehouse, P., Breit, L., McCloskey, E., Ketelhut, D. J., &, Dede, C., (2006). An overview of current findings from empirical research on oTPD. In, C. Dede, (Ed.), Online professional development for teachers: emerging models and methods (pp. 13-29). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
45. Zhao, Y., &, Cziko, G., (2001). Teacher adoption of technology: a perceptual control theory perspective. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 5-30.