Research Article

The Effects of Previous Experience and Self Efficacy on the Acceptance of e-Learning Platforms Among Younger Students in Saudi Arabia

Omar Sulaymani 1 , Ahmad R. Pratama 2 * , Moneer Alshaikh 3 , Ali Alammary 4
More Detail
1 The International and Foreign Education Office in Makkah Region, Saudi Arabia2 Department of Informatics, Universitas Islam Indonesia, Yogyakarta, Indonesia3 Department of Cybersecurity, College of Computer Science and Engineering, The University of Jeddah, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia4 College of Computing and Informatics, Saudi Electronic University, Jeddah, Makkah Region, Saudi Arabia* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(2), April 2022, ep349, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11524
Published: 09 January 2022
OPEN ACCESS   3398 Views   1856 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

In Saudi Arabia, some e-learning initiatives such as the Future Gate Project (FGP) and Madrasati (MySchool) have been in place since 2018 and 2020, respectively. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, they were used as a means of distance learning for students across the country. This paper investigates the willingness of students to use the e-learning platforms and whether it varies across different sex and age group. Primary data in the form of a survey of 265 secondary school students across the Makkah region was analysed with Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) by using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as a theoretical framework. We found that students’ self-efficacy, which is strongly influenced by their previous experience with the underlying technology used in the e-learning platforms, has a positive effect for older students in high school, yet surprisingly, a negative one for younger students in middle school. We also found that perceived ease of use and social influence to be the most important factors behind the students’ acceptance of e-learning platforms and that the effects are stronger for female students than for male students. While this study was conducted in Saudi Arabia, the findings from this study provide a first-hand insight that can help ensure the continuity of the e-learning platforms if they are to be implemented permanently as distance learning platforms even after the end of the pandemic that is also applicable to any other countries.
Keywords: e-learning, distance learning, previous experience, self-efficacy, COVID-19 pandemic

CITATION (APA)

Sulaymani, O., Pratama, A. R., Alshaikh, M., & Alammary, A. (2022). The Effects of Previous Experience and Self Efficacy on the Acceptance of e-Learning Platforms Among Younger Students in Saudi Arabia. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(2), ep349. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/11524

REFERENCES

  1. Alahmari, A. (2017). The state of distance education in Saudi Arabia. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 18(2), 91-98.
  2. Alammary, A., Alshaikh, M., & Alhogail, A. (2021). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the adoption of e-learning among academics in Saudi Arabia. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2021.1973106
  3. Alammary, A., Carbone, A., & Sheard, J. (2016). Blended learning in higher education: Delivery methods selection. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth European Conference on Information Systems, Istanbul, Turkey.
  4. Al-Ohali, Y., Alhojailan, M., Palavitsinis, N., Najjar, J., Koutoumanos, A., & AlSuhaibani, A. (2019, July). Human factors in digital transformation of education: Lessons learned from the Future Gate at Saudi K-12. The International conference on applied human factors and ergonomics (pp. 52-64). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20135-7_5
  5. Al Ohali, Y., Al Suhaibani, A., Palavitsinis, N., & Koutoumanos, A. (2018, November). Digital transformation of education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Deploying a country-wide learning management system for K-12 education. The 17th European conference on e-learning (pp. 1-2). Athens, Greece.
  6. Alshmrani, Z. A., & Almalki, A. (2020). The role of mathematics teachers in activating the future gate tools in public schools in Jeddah Governorate. Journal of Educational and Psychological Sciences, 4(46), 21-39. https://doi.org/10.26389/AJSRP.R130620
  7. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411-423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
  8. Arnott, L., & Yelland, N. J. (2020). Multimodal lifeworlds: Pedagogies for play inquiries and explorations. Journal of Early Childhood Education Research, 9(1), 124-146.
  9. Bellaaj, M., Zekri, I., & Albugami, M. (2015). The continued use of e-learning system: An empirical investigation using UTAUT model at the University of Tabuk. Journal of Theoretical & Applied Information Technology, 72(3), 464-474.
  10. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  11. 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), 982-1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
  12. Dialogue, K. A. A. C. f. N. (2017). The survey of Saudi children’s use of smart devices and electronic games. https://kacnd.org/News/NewsDetails/1391
  13. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382-388. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  14. Hebebci, M. T., Bertiz, Y., & Alan, S. (2020). Investigation of views of students and teachers on distance education practices during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 4(4), 267-282. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.113
  15. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
  16. Hernández-Lara, A. B., & Serradell-López, E. (2018). Student interactions in online discussion forums: Their perception on learning with business simulation games. Behaviour & Information Technology, 37(4), 419-429. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1441326
  17. Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27.
  18. Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424-453. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
  19. Huang, J. H., Lin, Y. R., & Chuang, S. T. (2007). Elucidating user behavior of mobile learning: A perspective of the extended technology acceptance model. The Electronic Library, 25(5), 585-598. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640470710829569
  20. Karakose, T., Yirci, R., & Papadakis, S. (2021). Exploring the interrelationship between COVID-19 phobia, work-family conflict, family-work conflict, and life satisfaction among school administrators for advancing sustainable management. Sustainability, 13(15), 8654. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158654
  21. Kim, J. (2020). Learning and teaching online during COVID-19: Experiences of student teachers in an early childhood education practicum. International Journal of Early Childhood, 52(2), 145-158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-020-00272-6
  22. Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
  23. MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130-149. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130
  24. Maphosa, V. (2021). Teachers’ perspectives on remote-based teaching and learning in the COVID-19 era: Rethinking technology availability and suitability in Zimbabwe. European Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Education, 2(1), e02105. https://doi.org/10.30935/ejimed/9684
  25. Masmali, A. (2020). A mixed-methods study of examining the concerns of Saudi Arabian middle and secondary school teachers in adopting the future gate learning management system: A transformation to digital learning [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University].
  26. Ministry of Education. (2017). Using tablets in the Saudis schools: Achieving 2030 vision. Saudi Arabia: Ministry of Education. www.moe.gov.sa
  27. Ministry of Education. (2019). The statistical guide of the General Administration of Education in Makkah Region for the year (1440-1441 AH). https://drive.google.com/file/d/13dGxt484255K5gyJyo0K1e7clgz05LOQ/view
  28. Ministry of Education. (2020). Madrasati is an e-learning management system: Ministry of Education. https://backtoschool.sa/
  29. Park, S. Y., Nam, M. W., & Cha, S. B. (2012). University students’ behavioral intention to use mobile learning: Evaluating the technology acceptance model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 592-605. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01229.x
  30. Pratama, A. R. (2017, March). Cross-country analysis of ICT and education indicators: An exploratory study. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 185(1), 012006. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/185/1/012006
  31. Pratama, A. R. (2020). Fun first, useful later: Mobile learning acceptance among secondary school students in Indonesia. Education and Information Technologies, 26(2), 1737-1753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10334-w
  32. Pratama, A. R., & Firmansyah, F. M. (2020). How can governments nudge students to become ebook readers? Evidence from Indonesia. Digital Library Perspectives, 37(3), 257-288. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-07-2020-0066
  33. Pratama, A. R., & Scarlatos, L. L. (2020). The roles of device ownership and infrastructure in promoting e-learning and m-learning in Indonesia. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 12(4), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2020100101
  34. Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
  35. Shyr, W.-J., & Chen, C.-H. (2018). Designing a technology‐enhanced flipped learning system to facilitate students’ self‐regulation and performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(1), 53-62. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12213
  36. Sulaymani, O., Fleer, M., & Chapman, D. (2020). A cultural-historical study of digital devices supporting peer collaboration in early years learning setting in one Saudi school. In A. Ridgway, G. Quiñones, & L. Li (Eds.), Peer play and relationships in early childhood (pp. 113-127). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42331-5_8
  37. Sun, L., Tang, Y., & Zuo, W. (2020). Coronavirus pushes education online. Nature Materials 19(6), 687-687. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-020-0678-8
  38. 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. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  39. Wang, Y. S., Wu, M. C., & Wang, H. Y. (2009). Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 92-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00809.x