Individual, technological, organizational, and environmental factors impact of the internet of things on e-learning adoption in higher education institutions in Jordan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The world of the Internet of Things (IoT), even though it is continuously morphing as a fresh paradigm at the intersection of technology and education, is still struggling with several difficulties that prevent its absorption into the e-learning platforms of higher education institutions (HEIs). The breadth of Internet of Things implementation in developing countries, particularly Jordan, Malaysia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Bangladesh, remains behind, even though industrialized nations have made significant advancements in their utilization of IoT, with the United Kingdom, the United States of America, China, and Japan acting as prominent examples. In the realm of research that focuses on the progression of the IOT integration into the e-learning systems of economically challenged countries, there is a substantial disparity. In particular, the focus of this research is on Jordan to shed light on the primary variables that are either facilitating or hindering the adoption of the IoT within the e-learning sector of Jordan's HEIs. A comprehensive analysis of previous research has been undertaken as a first stage in this investigation. The goal of this analysis is to identify important factors that are involved in the process of IOT adoption. Following that, we used an inferential technique, collecting data from 306 respondents who were enrolled in Jordanian higher education institutions. During our investigation, we discovered that the rate of the IOT integration was significantly influenced by factors such as accessibility, usability, technical assistance, and individual capabilities. In addition, our findings suggest that factors such as attitude, behavior, financial preparedness, dependability, and training have a substantial impact on the adoption of the IOT. On the other hand, the study seemed to indicate that characteristics such as class capacity, awareness, system resources, and course design had a minor influence on the adoption rates inside HEIs. In conclusion, this study provides tangible suggestions to strengthen the integration of the IoT inside Jordanian HEIs. These recommendations provide significant insights that can be used by policy architects, government entities, and higher education institutions to overcome the challenges that relate to the deployment of IoT in the higher learning sector.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".