Factors Influencing the Use of Learning Management System in Saudi Arabian Higher Education: A Theoretical Framework
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to present the theoretical framework underlying a research on factors that influence utilization of the Jusur Learning Management System (Jusur LMS) in Saudi Arabian public universities. Development of the theoretical framework was done based on library research approach. Initially, the existing literature relevant to the subject was reviewed to determine the important variables related to factors influencing the use of LMS in higher education. The paper provides insights of the external and internal variables or factors that influence the use of Jusur LMS for teaching and learning purposes. The internal variables consist of the attitude of Saudi Arabian faculty members towards using LMS, their beliefs towards e-learning, and their competence level in using LMS. The external variables consist of barriers faced by the faculty members and demographic factors. This study was limited to the use of Jusur LMS, one of the e-learning management tools used in Saudi Arabian universities, and surveyed faculty members of Saudi Arabian public universities. This theoretical framework can be adapted to suit the requirements of other similar studies related to planning and implementation of various technology programs in higher education.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it