MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062552740 · doi:10.5539/ass.v10n14p186

Usage of Learning Management System (Moodle) among Postgraduate Students: UTAUT Model

2014· article· en· W2062552740 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnified theory of acceptance and use of technologyModerationExpectancy theoryLearning ManagementPsychologySet (abstract data type)Mathematics educationKnowledge managementComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of a learning management system (LMS) Moodle is learning and teaching platform in Universiti Utara Malaysia. To examine the level of acceptance of this technology, the UTAUT (Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology) Model is used to infer individual students’ technology acceptance by explaining the variants in Behavior Intention (BI). This study is conducted on 65 postgraduate students pursuing their study at UUM. The students are all studying the same course and they are exposed to the application of LMS known as ‘Moodle UUM Learning Zone’. A set of questionnaire, in the UTAUT Model which is developed by Venkatesh et al. (2003), is used to collect data which is then descriptively analyzed by using IBM SPSS Statistics Version 20 and SmartPLS 2.0. The findings of the study found that Performance Expectancy (PE) (?=0.418, p<0.01), Social Influence (SI) (?=0.238, p<0.01) and Facilitating Conditions (FC) (?=0.120, p<0.01) have positive influence towards ‘Behavioral Intention’ (BI). The value R2 = 0.520 showed that 52.0% of the variants in the application of Learning zone can be explained by Behavioral Intention (BI). Consequently, the result related to moderator influence in terms of gender showed that all the four UTAUT Model constructs failed to reject HO5. The results also showed that moderator influence in terms of gender with PE, EE, SI and FC does not have significant positive influence towards BI. The findings of this study which are hoped to help encourage instructors and students to use this technology in their learning and teaching processes, have proven that LMS ‘Moodle’ is beneficial and effective for learning and teaching processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.320 · 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