Mobile Learning: Lecturers versus Students on Usage and Perception using the UTAUT Model

Lenandlar SinghDepartment of Computer Science, University of Guyana

lenandlar.singh@uog.edu.gyKemuel Gaffar

Department of Computer Science, University of Guyanakemuel.gaffar@uog.edu.gy

Troy ThomasDepartment of Mathematics, Physics and Statistics, University of Guyana

troy.thomas@uog.edu.gy

Outline

• Introduction

• Background

• Review of Literature

• Research Questions

• Methodology

• Results

• Discussion

• Conclusion

• Recommendations and Future Work

Introduction

• E-learning has transformed the educational landscape worldwide

• Technology is fundamentally changing the way we teach and learn

• New pedagogical models, curriculum delivery methods and learning systems.

• One area of e-learning that is gaining increasing popularity and attention is mobile learning (m-learning)

• M-learning has essentially extended the reach of e-learning and distance education systems by allowing educators and students to teach and learn anywhere, anytime and on the move

Introduction

Background & Context

• Despite increased use of mobile devices, Guyana is faced with several problemso Bandwidth issueso Cost of equipment /service o Lack of competition (only 2 mobile providers)

• With these in mind, m-learning at the University of Guyana appears far-fetched

o Lack of policy

o Inadequate infrastructure

o Cost of hardware and software systems

o Culture?

• M-learning is an opportunity for the University of Guyana and similar environments

o What opportunities exist?

o Lack of experimentation and perception!

Literature Review• Research in m-learning still in its infancy stage

• Experimentation mostly in developed countries with affordable mobile technology and fast-paced developments

• Wang et al. (2010) claims that studies that explore the best practice of m-learning are largely undefined.

• Need for systematic studies that examine instructors’ and students’ m-learning experience

• Lack of empirical evidence to show that mobile technology engages students and promote learning (Hlodan, 2010)

• Jairak et al. (2009) found positive effects of various factors on attitude to technology and behavioural intention.

Research Questions

(i) To investigate the extent of ownership and usage of mobile devices by staff and students at the University of Guyana.

(ii) To investigate the relationships among the elements of the UTAUT model with specific focus on how they influence attitude towards and intentions to use M-learning technologies.

(iii) To assess the relative propensity for adoption of M-learning between students and lecturers.

Method

Large scale (online) survey of students and lecturers• Approximately 10% response rate from student population (508

responses)

• Approximately 20% response rate from lecturers after supplementary paper survey (63 responses)

Survey items• Attitudinal items adopted from Jairak et al. (2009)

Analysis• UTAUT (Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology) Model

by Vanketesh et al. (2003)

Method

Analysis

• Factor analysis: Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Factor scores generated by regression method and saved.

• Evaluation of internal consistency (Cronbach Alpha).

• Path analysis based on the factor scores.

• Comparisions of mean scale levels: Students vs. Lecturers.

Tested Model

4

The Research Model Used (Adopted from Jairak et al. (2009) with modifications)

Device Ownership

Phone Capabilities

Mobile Phone Usage

Factors from student Data

Factors from Staff Data

Path Model for Student Data

Path Model for Staff Data

Mean Scale Levels

NSDx /*96.1

Scale Stud N

Lect N

Stud SD (Stud)

SD(Lect)

Lect

95% CI (Stud)

Lower Upper

PE 381 56 16.22 2.966 2.838 15.20 15.922 16.518

EE 390 56 12.56 2.219 2.084 10.95 12.34 12.78

SF 394 55 9.98 2.693 2.213 9.75 9.714 10.246

FC 359 54 17.19 3.895 4.120 13.69 16.787 17.593

ATT 396 56 12.79 2.111 1.678 12.14 12.582 12.998

BI 386 54 11.78 2.546 2.540 9.76 11.526 12.034

x x

Recommendations

• Further research on scale development.

• Further research with larger sample size for lecturers.

• To influence the use of mobile learning among lecturers (if desired) the facilitating conditions inclusive of support mechanisms, and infrastructure should be addressed since this seems to have a substantial impact on behaviour.

Recommendations

• The university can also seek to form relationships with technology providers so that devices and services (e.g. mobile phones) can be make available at reasonable prices.

• Further experimental studies should be conducted on the effects of the use of mobile learning on the quality of student experience and on the effects on learning.

References

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E. & Tatham, R. L. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis, 6 edn, Pearson Education Inc.

Hlodan, O. (2010). Mobile learning anytime, anywhere. BioScience, Vol. 60, No. 9 (October 2010), p. 682

Jairak, K., Praneetpolgrang, P. & Mekhabunchakij, K. (2009). An Acceptance of Mobile Learning for Higher Education Students in Thailand. Special Issue of the International Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Management, Vol. 17 No. SP3, December, 2009

 

Tacq, Jacques (1997) Multivariate Analysis Techniques in Social ScienceResearch: From Problem to Analysis. SAGE Publications Ltd.

References

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, pp. 425-478. 2003.

Wang. M., Shen. R., Novak, D., & Pan, X. (2009). The impact of mobile learning on students’ learning behaviours and performance: Report from a large blended classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology Vol. 40, No. 4 2009, 673–695

End of Presentation

THANK YOU!