MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1486867901 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v13i3.1152

M-learning adoption: A perspective from a developing country

2012· article· en· W1486867901 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shakeel Iqbal, Ijaz A. Qureshi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeveloping countryM-learningContext (archaeology)UsabilityPerspective (graphical)PerceptionKnowledge managementEducational technologyOrder (exchange)Affect (linguistics)Learning stylesMobile devicePsychologyBusinessComputer scienceMathematics educationGeographyWorld Wide WebEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

M-learning is the style of learning for the new millennium. Decreases in cost and increases in capabilities of mobile devices have made this medium attractive for the dissemination of knowledge. Mobile engineers, software developers, and educationists represent the supply side of this technology, whereas students represent the demand side. In order to further develop and improve this medium of learning it is imperative to find out students’ perceptions about m-learning adoption. To achieve this objective a survey was conducted among the students of 10 chartered universities operating in the twin cities of Rawalpindi and Islamabad in Pakistan. The results indicate that perceived usefulness, ease of use, and facilitating conditions significantly affect the students’ intention to adopt m-learning, whereas perceived playfulness is found to have less influence. Social influence is found to have a negative impact on adoption of m-learning. The findings of this study are useful in providing guidance to developers and educators for designing m-learning courses specifically in the context of developing countries.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.251
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations193
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed LearningSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207