| Literature DB >> 26576451 |
A Balavivekanandhan1, S Arulchelvan1.
Abstract
The boom in mobile technology has seen a dramatic rise in its usage. This has led to usage of mobiles even in the academic context for further learning. Although the advantages of m-learning (mobile learning) are visible, studies are required to address the aspects that shape its virtual expectations. The acceptance of mobile technology relies mostly on how the students feel about mobile technology fitting into their requirements. Yet, in spite of the significance in the potential of m-learning, research studies have only inadequate data to identify the factors that influence their decision to adapt the mobile technology for the purpose of learning. To deal with this space, the present study was undertaken to correlate the IT skills of students with their impact on their acceptance of m-learning. The research study found that the perceived usability along with the usefulness of m-learning impacts the association between IT expertise and the objective of learners' acceptance of m-learning. A survey of 892 students from Engineering, Arts, and Science Colleges found that IT skills influence student's acquisition of m-learning technology. Specialized and advanced skills in mobile technology along with basic skills play a significant role in influencing a student to accept m-learning. But no specific substantiation has been established to support the statement that highly developed IT skills have influenced the students to accept m-learning.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26576451 PMCID: PMC4632008 DOI: 10.1155/2015/248760
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Figure 1Model of students' acceptance of m-Learning.
Figure 2Results for SEM modeling on students' acceptance of m-Learning.
| Notes | |
|---|---|
|
| |
| Input | |
| Data | C:∖Users∖data.sav |
| Active dataset | DataSet1 |
| Filter | <none> |
| Weight | <none> |
| Split file | <none> |
|
| 892 |
| Missing value handling | |
| Definition of missing | Handling of user-defined missing values of nominal independent variables depends on the growing method. |
| Cases used | Only cases with valid data for the dependent variable and some or all independent variables are used in computing any statistics. |
|
| TREE device [s] BY USEFULNESS [s] USABILITY [s] ACCEPTENCE [s] BASIKSKILL [s] ADVANCESKILL [s] MOBILESKILL [s] |
| /TREE DISPLAY=TOPDOWN NODES=STATISTICS BRANCHSTATISTICS=YES NODEDEFS=YES SCALE=AUTO | |
| /PRINT MODELSUMMARY RISK | |
| /GAIN SUMMARYTABLE=YES TYPE=[NODE] SORT=DESCENDING CUMULATIVE=NO | |
| /METHOD TYPE=CHAID | |
| /GROWTHLIMIT MAXDEPTH=AUTO MINPARENTSIZE=100 MINCHILDSIZE=50 | |
| /VALIDATION TYPE=NONE OUTPUT=BOTHSAMPLES | |
| /CHAID ALPHASPLIT=0.05 ALPHAMERGE=0.05 SPLITMERGED=NO ADJUST=BONFERRONI INTERVALS=10. | |
| Resources | |
| Processor time | 00:00:00.90 |
| Elapsed time | 00:00:00.59 |
| Files saved | |
| Rules file | |
|
| |
| Model summary | |
|
| |
| Specifications | |
| Growing method | CHAID |
| Dependent variable | Types of device you own |
| Independent variables | PERCEIVED USEFULNESS, PERCEIVED USABILITY, ACCEPTANCE BEHAVIOR, FUNDAMENTAL IT ABILITY, HIGHLY DEVELOPED IT ABILITY, SOPHISTICATED MOBILE PROFICIENCY |
| Validation | None |
| Maximum tree depth | 3 |
| Minimum cases in parent node | 100 |
| Minimum cases in child node | 50 |
| Results | |
| Independent variables included | PERCEIVED USEFULNESS, SOPHISTICATED MOBILE PROFICIENCY |
| Number of nodes | 10 |
| Number of terminal nodes | 8 |
| Depth | 2 |
Gain summary for nodes.
| Node |
| Percent | Mean |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | 67 | 7.5% | 3.24 |
| 6 | 200 | 22.4% | 3.00 |
| 5 | 157 | 17.6% | 3.00 |
| 4 | 149 | 16.7% | 3.00 |
| 9 | 77 | 8.6% | 3.00 |
| 7 | 64 | 7.2% | 3.00 |
| 2 | 113 | 12.7% | 2.44 |
| 1 | 65 | 7.3% | 1.23 |
Growing method: CHAID.
Dependent variable: types of device you own.
Risk.
| Estimate | Std. error |
|---|---|
| 0.078 | 0.010 |
Growing method: CHAID.
Dependent variable: types of device you own.
| Estimate | SE | CR |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived usefulness ← acceptance behavior | 0.103 | 0.045 | 7.750 | 0.16 |
| Perceived usefulness ← perceived usability | 0.331 | 0.036 | 11.275 | 0.41 |
| Acceptance behavior ← perceived usability | 0.018 | 0.047 | 1.279 | 0.71 |
| Fundamental IT ability ← perceived usefulness | 0.181 | 0.045 | −4.230 | 0.21 |
| Fundamental IT ability and sophisticated mobile proficiency | −0.075 | 0.057 | 5.092 | 0.27 |
| Fundamental IT ability ← highly developed IT ability | −0.041 | 0.052 | −2.460 | 0.92 |
| Highly developed IT ability ← sophisticated mobile proficiency | 0.043 | 0.053 | 10.931 | 0.31 |
| Highly developed IT ability ← acceptance behavior | 0.119 | 0.046 | 6.200 | 0.15 |
Model summary and parameter estimates. Dependent variable, perceived usefulness.
| Equation | Model summary | Parameter estimates | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| df1 | df2 | Sig. | Constant |
|
| |
| Linear | 0.010 | 10.379 | 1 | 998 | 0.001 | 3.432 | 0.094 | — |
| Quadratic | 0.012 | 5.936 | 2 | 997 | 0.003 | 3.709 | −0.086 | 0.027 |
The independent variable is acceptance behavior.