Evaluation of Online Video Usage and Learning Satisfaction: An Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study was to examine the determining factors of students' video usage and their learning satisfaction relating to the supplementary application of educational videos, accessible in a Moodle environment in a Business Mathematics Course. The research model is based on the extension of Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), in which the core TAM constructs – perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude – and internet self-efficacy were included as the explanatory factors of video usage. As regards the determinants of learning satisfaction, beside the core TAM constructs, the role of learning performance, learner-learner interaction, and learner-teacher interaction was examined. Data were collected from 89 students using a questionnaire, on which the partial least-squares structural equation modelling approach was used to evaluate the research model. The results confirmed that perceived usefulness, attitude, and internet self-efficacy had a direct effect on the video usage. Learning satisfaction was directly influenced by learner-learner interaction, perceived ease of use, and learning performance. Furthermore, the results indicated that video usage had a significant effect both on learning performance and on learning satisfaction. The findings show that the extended TAM model can be applied for predicting the university students' video technology usage and their learning satisfaction regarding the usage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".