MODELING TECHNOLOGY ACCEPTANCE AMONG PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS

Technology Acceptance in Education: Research and Issues

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 79-99

  Teo, Timothy ^a  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85141491494     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (69)

1. Agarwal, R., and Prasad, J. (1999). Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies? Decision Sciences, 30(2), 361-391.
2. Arbuckle, J. L. (2006). AMOS (Version 7.0) [Computer Program]. Chicago: SPSS.
3. Bagozzi, R. P., Davis, F. D., and Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Development and test of a theory of technological learning and usage. Human Relations, 45(7), 660-686.
4. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychologist, 37, 122-147.
5. Barclay, D., Higgins, C., and Thompson, R. (1995). The Partial Least Squares (PLS) approach to causal modeling: Personal computer adoption and use as an illustration. Technology Studies, 2(2), 285-309.
6. Bayhan, P., Olgun, P., and Yelland, N. (2002). A study of pre-school teachers’ thoughts about computer assisted instruction. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 3(2), 298-303.
7. Bereiter, C., and Scardamalia, M. (2006). Education for the knowledge age. In P. A. Alexander and P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 695-713). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Brown, T. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York: Guildford Press.
9. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
10. Carmines, E. G., and McIver, J. P. (1981). Analyzing models with unobserved variables. In G. W. Bohrnstedt and E. F. Borgatta (Eds.), Social measurement: Current issues. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
11. Cheung, W., and Huang, W. (2005). Proposing a framework to assess Internet usage in university education: An empirical investigation from a student’s perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 237-253.
12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Compeau, D. R., and Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189-211.
14. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
15. Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38, 475-487.
16. Davis, F. D., and Venkatesh, V. (1996). A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: Three experiments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(1), 19-45.
17. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., and Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
18. Dishaw, M. T., and Strong, D. M. (1999). Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs. Information and Management, 36(1), 9-21.
19. Drennan, J., Kennedy, J., and Pisarksi, A. (2005). Factors affecting student attitudes toward flexible online learning in management education. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(6), 331-340.
20. Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intension and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
21. Fornell, C., and Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 39-50.
22. Fornell, C., Tellis, G. J., and Zinkhan, G. M. (1982). Validity assessment: A structural equations approach using partial least squares. Proceedings, American Marketing Association Educators’ conference.
23. Gao, Y. (2005). Applying the Technology Acceptance Model to educational hypermedia: A field study. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 14(3), 237-247.
24. Gefen, D., Straub, D. W., and Boudreau, M. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 4(7), 1-78.
25. Gefen, D. (2003). TAM or just plain habit: A look at experienced online shoppers. Journal of End User Computing, 15(3), 1-13.
26. Gong, M., Xu, Y., and Yu, Y. (2004). An enhanced Technology Acceptance Model for web-based learning. Journal of Information Systems Education, 15(4), 365-374.
27. Groves, M. M., and Zemel, P. C. (2000). Instructional technology adoption in higher education: An action research case study. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(1), 57-65.
28. Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., and Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
29. Hasan, B. (2006). Delineating the effects of general and system-specific computer self-efficacy beliefs on IS acceptance. Information and Management, 43(5), 565-571.
30. Hoelter, J. W. (1983). The analysis of covariance structures: Goodness-of-fit indices. Sociological Methods and Research, 11, 325-344.
31. Hu, P. J., Clark, T. H. K., and Ma, W. W. (2003). Examining technology acceptance by school teachers: A longitudinal study. Information and Management, 41(2), 227-241.
32. Igbaria, M. (1990). End-user computing effectiveness: a structural equation model. Omega, 18(6), 637-652.
33. Jackson, C. M., Chow, S., and Leitch, R. A. (1997). Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use an information system. Decision Sciences, 23, 587-605.
34. Khorrami-Arani, O. (2001). Researching computer self-efficacy. International Education Journal, 2(4), 17-25.
35. Kiraz, E., and Ozdemir, D. (2006). The relationship between educational ideologies and technology acceptance in pre-service teachers. Educational Technology and Society, 9(2), 152-165.
36. Klem, L. (2000). Structural equation modeling. In L. Grimm and P. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding multivariate statistics, (Vol. II). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
37. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
38. Lederer, A. L., Maupin, D. J., Sens, M. P., and Zhuang, Y. (2000). The technology acceptance model and the World Wide Web. Decision Support Systems, 29, 269-282.
39. Legris, P., Ingham, J., and Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information and Management, 40(3), 1-14.
40. Liaw, S. S., and Huang, H. M. (2003). An investigation of user attitudes toward search engines as an information retrieval tool. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 751-765.
41. Lim, C. P., and Khine, M. S. (2006). Managing teachers’ barriers to ICT integration in Singapore schools. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(1), 97-125.
42. Lu, J., Yu, C., Liu, C., and Yao, J. (2003). Technology acceptance model for wireless internet. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 13(3), 206-222.
43. Ma, W. W. K., Andersson, R., and Streith, K. O. (2005). Examining user acceptance of computer technology: An empirical study of student teachers. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(6), 387-395.
44. Mirani, R., and King, W. R. (1994). Impacts of end-user and information center characteristics on enduser computing support. Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(1), 141-166.
45. Moon, J., and Kim, Y. (2001). Extending the TAM for a world-wide-web context. Information and Management, 38(4), 217-230.
46. McCoy, S., Galletta, D. F., and King, W. R. (2007). Applying TAM across cultures: The need for caution. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(1), 81-90.
47. McDonald, R. P., and Ho, M. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 64-82.
48. Ngai, E. W. T., Poon, J. K. L., and Chan, Y. H. C. (2007). Empirical examination of the adoption of WebCT using TAM. Computers and Education. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.11.007.
49. Nunnally, J. C., and Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
50. Pan, C., Sivo, S. A., and Brophy, J. (2003). Students’ attitude in a web-enhanced hybrid course: A structural equation modeling inquiry. Journal of Educational Media and Library Sciences, 41(2), 181-194.
51. Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., and Papagianna, A. (2007). Individual characteristics and computer self-efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice. Computer and Education. Corrected Proof.
52. Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers and Education, 37, 163-178.
53. Riemenschneider, C. K., Harrison, D. A., and Mykytn, P. P., Jr. (2003). Understanding IT adoption decisions in small business: Integrating current theories. Information and Management, 40(4), 269-285.
54. Segars, A. L., and Grover, V. (1993). Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: A confirmatory factor analysis. MIS Quarterly, 17(4), 517-525.
55. Subramanian, G. H. (1994). A replication of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use measurement. Decision Sciences, 25(5/6), 863-873.
56. Sugar, W., Crawley, F., and Fine, B. (2004). Examining teachers’ decisions to adopt new technology. Educational Technology and Society, 7(4), 201-213.
57. Taylor, S., and Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144-176.
58. Thong, J. Y. L., Hong, W., and Tam, K. Y. (2002). Understanding user acceptance of digital libraries: What are the roles of interface characteristics, organizational context, and individual differences? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57(3), 215-242.
59. Teo, T. (2009). The impact of subjective norm and facilitating conditions on pre-service teachers’ attitude towards computer use: A structural equation modeling of an extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(1), 89-109.
60. Teo, T., Lee, C. B., and Chai, C. S. (2007). Understanding pre-service teachers’ computer attitudes: applying and extending the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(2), 128-143.
61. Teo, T. S. H., Lim, V. K. G., and Lai, R. Y. C. (1999). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in internet usage. Omega, 27(1), 25-37.
62. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., and Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 124-143.
63. Venkatesh, V., and Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204.
64. Williams, P. (2002). The learning Web: The development, implementation and evaluation of Internetbased undergraduate materials for the teaching of key skills. Active Learning in Higher Education, 3(1), 40-53.
65. Yi, M. Y., and Hwang, Y. (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.
66. Yuen, H. K., Law, N., and Chan, H. (1999). Improving IT training for serving teachers through evaluation. In G. Cumming, T. Okamoto, and L. Gomez (Eds.), Advanced research in computers and communications in education (Vol. 2, pp. 441-448). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
67. Zhang, X., and Prybutok, V. R. (2004). An empirical study of online shopping: A service perspective. International Journal of Services Technology and Management, 5(1), 1-13.
68. Zhao, Y., and Cziko, G. A. (2001). Teacher adoption of technology: A perceptual control theory perspective. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 5-30.
69. Zhao, Y., Tan, H., and Mishra, P. (2001). Technology: Teaching and learning: Whose computer is it? Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 44(4), 348-355.