Mlearning acceptance among ru students

1

WANCHAT MATHADr. KAMAL BASHA MADARSHA

Institute of Education, International Islamic University Malaysia

MOBILE LEARNING ACCEPTANCE AMONG STUDENTS OF RAMKHAMHAENG

UNIVERSITY, THAILAND

1st YRU International Conference on Islamic Education

BACKGROUND OF STUDY

Source: National Statistical Office, Ministry of Information and Communication Technology. (2011).

2006 2007 2008 2009 20100

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

8.47 9.32 10.96 12.33 13.8415.39 16.04 16.99 17.93 19.13

24.7428.29

31.8634.83

38.24

Internet Computer Mobile Tech.

Million People

1st YRU International Conference on Islamic Education, 23-26 January 2013, Songkla, Thailand

The Use of ICT in Thailand

M-learning’ Usefulness * Problem**

Limitations of Mobile

Devices

Not Fully Use

Gap between University and Students

Anytime

Anywhere

* (Georgiev et al.,2004; Leung & Chan, 2003; Monchai, 2004)**(Akour, 2009; Pansak & Kalayanee, 2006; Suchat, 2006)

BACKGROUND OF STUDY


OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationship between the several factors and students’ m-learning acceptance


RESEARCH FRAMEWORK

Students’ Intention to

Use M-learning

Perceived Ease of Use

Perceived Usefulness

Network Accessibility Quality of

Content

Student Readines

s

Thai Social

Influence


Extended Technology Acceptance Model

(Akour, 2009; Davis , 1989; Huang et al, 2007; Kallaya et al, 2009; Liu et al, 2010; Lu & Viehland, 2008; Venkatesh et al, 2003)

RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

• PU has no positive effect on students’ intention to use m-leaning

• PEU has no positive effect on students’ intention to use m-leaning

• NA has no positive effect on students’ intention to use m-leaning

• QC has no positive effect on students’ intention to use m-leaning

• SR has no positive effect on students’ intention to use m-leaning

• TH has no positive effect on students’ intention to use m-leaning


• Survey research• Reliability

analysis• Multiple

regression analysis

Purposive sampling

n=200


RESEARCH METHODOLOGYRamkhahaeng

UniversityStudents

FINDINGS


52%49%

Male

Female

Demographic Profiles of Respondents

Gender

FINDINGS


Demographic Profiles of Respondents

100%

52%

28.5%24%

19%

7%0%

Mobile Devices Used for Learning

FINDINGS


Variable Cronbach’s Alpha

Perceived Usefulness (PU) 0.857

Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) 0.857

Network Accessibility (NA) 0.918

Quality of Content (QC) 0.862

Student Readiness (SR) 0.908

Thai Social Influence (TH) 0.828

Students’ Intention to Use (IN)

0.935

Reliability Analysis

α range from

0.79 to 0.91

FINDINGS


The Level of M-learning Acceptance

Constructs S.D. Level

Perceived Usefulness (PU) 4.14 0.40 High

Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) 3.84 0.53 Moderate

Network Accessibility (NA) 4.11 0.43 High

Quality of Content (QC) 4.18 0.40 High

Student Readiness (SR) 4.20 0.75 High

Thai Social Influence (TH) 4.13 0.42 High

Students’ Intention to Use (IN)

4.46 0.39 High

X

M-learning Acceptance

FINDINGS


Multiple Regression Analysis ResultM-learning Acceptance

Perceived Usefulness

Perceived Ease of Use

Network Accessibility

Quality of Content

Student Readiness

Thai Social Influence

Students’ Intention to Use M-learning

.480

.364

.157

.025*

.004*

.001*

* Significant at p < 0.05,

FINDINGS


M-learning Acceptance

• Thai Social Influence

• Student Readiness

• Quality of Content

CONCLUSION


The ROLE of SOCIETY, READINESS of LEARNERS, and QUALITY of LEARNING MATERIAL are important to further uplift the use of m-learning in Thailand

The university administration should emphasize on how to design m-learning system that appropriate to student’s perception.

REFERENCESAkour, H. (2009). Determinants of mobile learning acceptance: an empirical

investigation in higher education. Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma, USA. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user

acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-339. Georgiev, T., Georgieva, E., & Smrikarov, A. (2004, June, 17-18). M-learning - a

new stage of e-learning. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies Computer System Technology, Rousse, Bulgaria.

Huang, Lin, & Chuang. (2007). Elucidating user behavior of mobile learning a perspective of the extended technology acceptance model. The Electronic Library, 25(5), 585-598.

Kallaya, J., Prasong, P., & Kittima, M. (2009). An acceptance of mobile learning for higher education students in Thailand. International Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Management, 17(3), 361-368.

Leung, C.-H., & Chan, Y.-Y. (2003, July,9-11). Mobile learning: A new paradigm in electronic learning. Paper presented at the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Athens, Greece.

Liu, Y., Li, H., & Carlsson, C. (2010). Factors driving the adoption of m-learning: an empirical study. Computer & Education, 55, 1211-1219.

Lu, X., & Viehland, D. (2008, December, 3-5). Factors influencing the adoption of mobile learning. Paper presented at the 19th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Christchurch.


REFERENCESMonchai, T. (2004). M-Learning: a new paradigm of e-learning. Technology and

Communication Education, 1(1), 3-11. National Statistical Office, Ministry of Information and Communication Technology.

(2011). Statistical yearbook Thailand 2011. Bangkok: National Statistical Office.

Pansak, T., & Kalayanee, J. (2006, November, 28 – 30). Advantages and disadvantages of m-learning for university students in Thailand. Paper presented at the APERA Conference 2006, Hong Kong.

Suchat, K. (2006). Technologies in Ramkhamhaeng University Retrieved January, 5, 2011, from http://www.ctc.ru.ac.th/.

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.


17

Thank You

Mobile Learning Acceptance among Students at Ramkhamhaeng University, Thailand

WANCHAT MATHA Dr. KAMAL BASHA MADARSHA

Institute of Education, IIUM

1st YRU International Conference on Islamic Education