MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388906970 · doi:10.5539/ies.v16n6p45

From Crisis to Continuity: Exploring Students’ Perspectives on the Future of Online Learning Beyond COVID-19

2023· article· en· W4388906970 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Salma Al-Nabhani, Abdullah Al-Abri

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOrganizational and Employee Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLikert scaleTechnology acceptance modelPsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)UsabilityTechnology integrationDistance educationHigher educationEducational technologyElectronic learningInstructional designMedical educationPedagogyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As we live in the post-COVID-19 era, much research should be devoted to guiding educators and policymakers on what to retain, revise, or even eliminate from the online learning experience. This study aimed to provide a deeper understanding of the students’ behavioural intention to continue using technology in the post-COVID-19 era. The study was grounded in a well-known theoretical model for assessing technology adoption, the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), expanded by adding the following external variables: accessibility (ACC), anxiety (ANX), feedback (FB), computer playfulness (CP) and perceived enjoyment (PNJ). A total of 134 undergraduate students from both public and private universities and colleges in Oman were included in the study. Data was collected through the administration of a Likert-scale questionnaire and analysed using descriptive tests and the Smart-PLS technique. The study’s main findings revealed that ACC, ANX, CP, and PNJ had a significant impact on Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU), while no such effect was observed on Perceived Usefulness (PU). Notably, the study concludes that students exhibit a high intention to continue using technology. The study underscores the increasing familiarity of interactive technology tools among teachers and students, a trend accelerated during the pandemic. However, a recommendation is made for the development of a comprehensive framework by educational stakeholders, including policy professionals and teachers, to specify the strategic use of technology and its intended purpose.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicOrganizational and Employee PerformanceFrench-language works237,207