MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2398763093 · doi:10.19173/irrodl.v17i3.2191

Diffusion of Innovations Approach to the Evaluation of Learning Management System Usage in an Open Distance Learning Institution

2016· article· en· W2398763093 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peter Mkhize, Emmanuel Samuel Mtsweni, Mokateko Portia Buthelezi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistance educationLearning ManagementInformation and Communications TechnologyKnowledge managementE learningDiffusion of innovationsInstitutionPsychologyBridge (graph theory)Data collectionHigher educationClass (philosophy)Medical educationEducational technologyComputer scienceMathematics educationSociologyBusinessMarketingWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="2">Academic institutions such as the University of South Africa (Unisa) are using information and communication technology (ICT) in order to conduct their daily primary operations, which are teaching and learning. Unisa is the only distance learning university in South Africa and also in Africa. Unisa currently has the highest number of students on the continent of Africa. In an attempt to bridge the gap between facilitators and students, Unisa introduced a learning management system known as myUnisa. MyUnisa is used by facilitators and students as a tool to conduct teaching and learning, and for communication. To the best of the researcher’s knowledge, factors that influence its acceptance and usage have not been studied prior to this study. The main deciders of the success of technology are the users, as is reflected in the well-established theories and models that exist to evaluate the acceptance of technology and innovation. The objective of this study was to understand the factors that contribute to the usage of myUnisa by students. An online questionnaire was used for data collection, and a quantitative analysis was conducted. Among others, the results reveal that complexity does not have a significant impact on the students' decision to use myUnisa.</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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.323 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations42
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed LearningSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207