Perspectives of students at institutions of higher education toward open distance learning
List of Authors
  • Noriza Abd Aziz

Keyword
  • Technology Acceptance Model, Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, Perceived Self-Efficacy, Behavioural Intention, Open Distance Learning

Abstract
  • Open and Distance Learning (ODL) is a way of learning remotely without being in regular face-to-face contact with an instructor in the classroom. Students learn the content using instructional materials that are uploaded on online platforms. Despite the convenience of the learning method, there is a need to assess students' awareness and intention to use these platforms. This paper evaluates whether perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEU), and perceived self-efficacy (PSE) can influence students enrolled at an institution of higher education (IHE) to choose open distance learning (ODL). The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) has been identified to support the research framework of this study. A research framework was proposed and three hypotheses were developed. Data were obtained from 125 respondents enrolled in the ODL Program using convenient sampling. Data were analyzed using the SPSS statistical program on descriptive statistics, factor analysis, and regression. The results revealed that PU and PSE have direct relationships with the behavioral intention to choose ODL. Therefore, PU and PSE influenced the students to choose ODL. Meanwhile, PEU has no direct relationship with behavioral intention to choose ODL. Therefore, PEU cannot attract the interest and attention to influence the students to use ODL. The study helped uncover a significant understanding of students’ acceptance of ODL for IHEs to develop further ODL programs related to Islamic Finance and Banking courses under Massive Open Online Courses (MOOC). Also, ODL provides opportunities for interactions and communications between students and lecturers through information and communication technology (ICT) and multimedia. This study provides further empirical support that behavioral intention is able to be influenced to choose ODL.

Reference
  • 1. Abd Aziz, N. (2016). The Perspective of Muslims and Non-Muslims towards Islamic Housing Financing: A Case Study of Hong Leong Bank and Hong Leong Islamic Bank Customers. PhD Dissertation, Universiti Sains Malaysia.

    2. Altinay, F., Altınay, M., Dagli, G. & Altınay, Z. (2019). A study of knowledge management systems processes and technology in open and distance education institutions in higher education. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 36(4), 314-321.

    3. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122-147.

    4. Chang, S.C. & Tung, F.C. (2008). An empirical investigation of students’ behavioural intentions to use the online learning course websites. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 71-83.

    5. Davis, F.D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end user information systems: Theory and results. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

    6. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 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 (1989), 982-1003.

    8. Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, Massachusetts, USA: Addison-Wesley.

    9. Guha, A.S. and Maji, S. (2008). E‐learning: the latest spectrum in open and distance learning. Social Responsibility Journal, 4(3), 297-305.

    10. Hu, P.J., Chau, P.Y.K., Sheng, O.R.L. & Tam, K.Y. (1999). Examining the technology acceptance model using physical acceptance of telemedicine technology. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(2), 91-112.

    11. Kanthawongs, P. & Kanthawongs, P. (2013). Individual and Social Factors Affecting Student’s Usage Intention in Using Learning Management System. Paper presented at the Social and Behavioural Sciences Symposium, 4th International Science, Social Science, Engineering and Energy Conference 2012 (I-SEEC 2012). Bangkok, Thailand. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 88 (2013) 89-95.

    12. Koufaris, M. (2002). Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online consumer behaviour. Information Systems Research, 13(2), 205-223.

    13. Landry, B.J.L., Griffith, R. & Hartman, S. (2006). Measuring student perceptions of blackboard using the technology acceptance model. Decision Sciences, 4(1), 87-99.

    14. Lepper, M. R. (1982). Microcomputers in education: Motivational and social issues. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., USA.

    15. Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with theory of planned behaviour. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 173-191.

    16. Malaysia Digital Economy Corporation (MDEC) Sdn Bhd, (2019), blob:https://mdec.my/abe86e8a-7a95-4407-92e2-1458973887c8 retrieved: 2 September 2023

    17. Minister of Education, (2015), https://www.moe.gov.my/en/muat-turun/laporan-dan-statistik/pendidikan-tinggi/buku-perangkaan/2015-1 retrieved: 2 September 2023

    18. Morris, M.G. & Dillon, A. (1997). The influence of user perceptions on software utilization: application and evaluation of a theoretical model of technology acceptance. IEEE Software.

    19. Oxford Languages, (2021). Oxford, England, UK: Oxford University Press.

    20. Paliwal, D. (2019). Reaching the unreached through open and distance learning in India: With special reference to Kumaun region of Uttarakhand. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 14(1), 39-49

    21. T. Ramayah, Noor Hazlina Ahmad, May-Chiun Lo (2010). The role of quality factors in intention to continue using an e-learning system in Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 5422-5426.

    22. Sekaran, U. & Bougie R. (2010). Research Method for Business: A Skill Building Approach. New York, New York, USA: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

    23. Shen, D., Laffey, J., Lin, Y. & Huang, X. (2006). Social Influence for Perceived Usefulness and Ease-of-Use of Course Delivery Systems. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 5(3) 2006, 270-282.

    24. Song, S.M. (2010). E-learning: Investigating students’ acceptance of online learning in hospitality programs.

    25. Sun, P.C., Tsai, R.J., Finger, G.F., Chen, Y.Y. & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50, 1183-1202.

    26. Szajna, B. (1996). Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science, 42(1), 85-92.

    27. Zickmund, W. G. (2003). Business Research Method (7th ed.). Mason, Georgia, USA: Thomson South Western.

    28. Davis, H.J. (1996). A review of open and distance learning within management development. Journal of Management Development, 15(4), 20-34.

    29. Guha, A.S. & Maji, S. (2008). E‐learning: the latest spectrum in open and distance learning. Social Responsibility Journal, 4(3), 297-305.