MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289175313 · doi:10.5539/ies.v9n2p73

Factors Affecting ICT Adoption among Distance Education Students based on the Technology Acceptance Model—A Case Study at a Distance Education University in Iran

2016· article· en· W2289175313 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Negin Barat Dastjerdi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation and Communications TechnologyLISRELPsychologySimple random samplePopulationDescriptive statisticsData collectionDistance educationUsabilityMedical educationMathematics educationStatisticsStructural equation modelingMathematicsComputer scienceSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="apa">The incorporation of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) into education systems is an active program and movement in education that illustrates modern education and enables an all-encompassing presence in the third millennium; however, prior to applying ICT, the factors affecting the adoption and use of these technologies should be carefully investigated. The present study was conducted to examine the factors affecting ICT adoption among distance education students based on the Technology Acceptance Model. The present descriptive survey was conducted in a statistical population consisting of all the distance education students residing in Isfahan, Iran, in 2013, 281 of who were selected as the sample population through simple random sampling. The data collection tool used was a researcher-made questionnaire designed based on field studies and using the questionnaires used in studies conducted by Nair (2012), Alanazy (2006) and Wikins (2008). The items in each section were designed based on the constructs and factors forming the Technology Acceptance Model examined in this study. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data in SPSS-21 and LISREL. The results of the analysis showed significant relationships between perceived usefulness and ease of ICT use and the attitude toward the use of these technologies, between the attitude toward ICT use and the decision to use ICT, and also between the decision to use ICT and its actual use.<strong></strong></p>

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207