Why some teachers easily learn to use a new virtual learning environment: a technology acceptance perspective

Interactive Learning Environments

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 539-552

  Rienties, Bart ^a,d   Giesbers, Bas ^b,e   Lygo Baker, Simon ^a   Ma, Hoi Wah Serena ^c   Rees, Roger ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SURREY   (United Kingdom)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^c Open University UK ^*  (United Kingdom)

^d OPEN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^e ERASMUS UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

experimental study; higher education; perceived ease of use; teacher; technology acceptance model; virtual learning environment

Indexed keywords

EID: 84893685636     PISSN: 10494820     EISSN: 17445191     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10494820.2014.881394     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. I.Ajzen, (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
2. I.Alvarez,, T.Guasch,, & A.Espasa, (2009). University teacher roles and competencies in online learning environments: A theoretical analysis of teaching and learning practices. European Journal of Teacher Education, 32(3), 321–336. doi:10.1080/02619760802624104 doi: 10.1080/02619760802624104
3. Z.Arbaugh, (2014). System, scholar, or students? Which most influences online MBA course effectiveness? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning doi: 10.1111/jcal.12048
4. R.P.Bagozzi, (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 244–254.
5. S.Brown, (2008). From VLEs to learning webs: The implications of Web 2.0 for learning and teaching. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(1), 1–10. doi:10.1080/10494820802158983 doi: 10.1080/10494820802158983
6. T.Browne,, M.Jenkins,, & R.Walker, (2006). A longitudinal perspective regarding the use of VLEs by higher education institutions in the United Kingdom. Interactive Learning Environments, 14(2), 177–192. doi:10.1080/10494820600852795 doi: 10.1080/10494820600852795
7. F.D.Davis, (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. doi: 10.2307/249008
8. F.D.Davis,, R.P.Bagozzi,, & P.R.Warshaw, (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1002. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
9. D.Ebert-May,, T.L.Derting,, J.Hodder,, J.L.Momsen,, T.M.Long,, & S.E.Jardeleza, (2011). What we say is not what we do: Effective evaluation of faculty professional development programs. BioScience, 61(7), 550–558. doi:10.1525/bio.2011.61.7.9 doi: 10.1525/bio.2011.61.7.9
10. B.Giesbers,, B.Rienties,, D.T.Tempelaar,, & W.H.Gijselaers, (2013). Investigating the relations between motivation, tool use, participation, and performance in an e-learning course using web-videoconferencing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 285–292. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.09.005 doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.09.005
11. R.Goldman,, R.Pea,, B.Barron,, & S.J.Derry, (2007). Video research in the learning sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. M.Gong,, Y.Xu,, & Y.Yu, (2004). An enhanced technology acceptance model for web-based learning. Journal of Information Systems Education, 15(4), 365–374.
13. V.Holmes,, W.Clark,, P.Burt,, & B.Rienties, (2013). Engaging teachers (and students) with media streaming technology, the case of box of broadcasts. In L.Wankel & P.Blessinger (Eds.), Increasing student engagement and retention using mobile applications: Smartphones, Skype and texting technologies (Vol. 6D, pp. 211–240). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Group.
14. P.Hu,, T.Clark,, & W.Ma, (2003). Examining technology acceptance by school teachers: A longitudinal study. Information Management, 41(2), 227–241. doi:10.1016/s0378-7206(03)00050-8 doi: 10.1016/S0378-7206(03)00050-8
15. M.Jenkins,, T.Browne,, R.Walker,, & R.Hewitt, (2010). The development of technology enhanced learning: Findings from a 2008 survey of UK higher education institutions. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(5), 447–465. doi:10.1080/10494820903484429 doi: 10.1080/10494820903484429
16. A.Jimoyiannis,, & V.Komis, (2007). Examining teachers’ beliefs about ICT in education: Implications of a teacher preparation programme. Teacher Development, 11(2), 149–173. doi:10.1080/13664530701414779 doi: 10.1080/13664530701414779
17. I.M.Kinchin, (2012). Avoiding technology-enhanced non-learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), E43–E48. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01264.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01264.x
18. K.A.Lawless,, & J.W.Pellegrino, (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614. doi:10.3102/0034654307309921 doi: 10.3102/0034654307309921
19. R.E.Mayer, (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 125–139. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00016-6 doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00016-6
20. P.Mishra,, & M.J.Koehler, (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
21. R.Moreno,, & R.Mayer, (2007). Interactive multimodal learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 309–326. doi:10.1007/s10648-007-9047-2 doi: 10.1007/s10648-007-9047-2
22. B.Pynoo,, P.Devolder,, J.Tondeur,, J.van Braak,, W.Duyck,, & P.Duyck, (2011). Predicting secondary school teachers’ acceptance and use of a digital learning environment: A cross-sectional study. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 568–575. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.10.005 doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.10.005
23. B.Rienties,, N.Brouwer,, & S.Lygo-Baker, (2013). The effects of online professional development on higher education teachers’ beliefs and intentions towards learning facilitation and technology. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 122–131. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2012.09.002 doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2012.09.002
24. B.Rienties,, W.Kaper,, K.Struyven,, D.T.Tempelaar,, L.Van Gastel,, S.Vrancken,, … E.Virgailaite-Meckauskaite, (2012). A review of the role of information communication technology and course design in transitional education practices. Interactive Learning Environments, 20(6), 563–581. doi:10.1080/10494820.2010.542757 doi: 10.1080/10494820.2010.542757
25. B.Rienties,, & D.Townsend, (2012). Integrating ICT in business education: Using TPACK to reflect on two course redesigns. In P.Van den Bossche, W.H.Gijselaers, & R.G.Milter (Eds.), Learning at the crossroads of theory and practice (Vol. 4, pp. 141–156). Dordrecht: Springer.
26. M.J.Sanchez-Franco, (2010). WebCT – the quasimoderating effect of perceived affective quality on an extending technology acceptance model. Computers & Education, 54(1), 37–46. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.005 doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.005
27. T.Seidel,, G.Blomberg,, & A.Renkl, (2013). Instructional strategies for using video in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34(0), 56–65. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2013.03.004 doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2013.03.004
28. Ø.Sørebø,, H.Halvari,, V.F.Gulli,, & R.Kristiansen, (2009). The role of self-determination theory in explaining teachers’ motivation to continue to use e-learning technology. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1177–1187. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.001 doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.001
29. Stes, A., De Maeyer, S., Gijbels, D., & Van Petegem, P. (2012). Instructional development for teachers in higher education: effects on students' learning outcomes. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(3), 295-308. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2011.611872
30. B.Šumak,, M.Heričko,, & M.Pušnik, (2011). A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning technology types. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2067–2077. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.005 doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.005
31. T.Teo, (2010). A path analysis of pre-service teachers’ attitudes to computer use: Applying and extending the technology acceptance model in an educational context. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(1), 65–79. doi:10.1080/10494820802231327 doi: 10.1080/10494820802231327
32. V.Venkatesh,, & H.Bala, (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
33. W.R.Watson,, S.L.Watson,, & C.M.Reigeluth, (2013). Education 3.0: Breaking the mold with technology. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–12. doi:10.1080/10494820.2013.764322 doi: 10.1080/10494820.2013.764322