| Literature DB >> 36119127 |
Aohua Ni1, Alan Cheung1.
Abstract
Previous studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) in facilitating English learning. However, no empirical research has been conducted on secondary students' intention to use ITSs in the language domain. This study proposes an extended technology acceptance model (TAM) to predict secondary students' continuance intention to use and actual use of ITSs for English learning. The model included fifteen hypotheses that were tested with 528 senior secondary students in China. The results of structural equation modeling showed that (1) perceived usefulness and price value had direct positive impacts on continuance intention; (2) perceived ease of use was not directly associated with students' intention but indirectly influenced intention via perceived usefulness; (3) through the mediation of perceptions, learning goal orientation and facilitating conditions were positively associated with continuance intention; (4) perceived enjoyment positively predicted and anxiety negatively predicted students' intention to use ITSs; and (5) students' continuance intention to use ITSs was significantly positively associated with their actual use of ITSs for English learning. The model showed strong explanatory power and might be implemented in future research. This study contributes to the theory and practice of ITSs in K-12 education.Entities:
Keywords: Actual use; Continuance intention; English learning; Intelligent tutoring system; Motivation; Structural equation modeling; Technology acceptance
Year: 2022 PMID: 36119127 PMCID: PMC9463967 DOI: 10.1007/s10639-022-11305-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Educ Inf Technol (Dordr) ISSN: 1360-2357
Fig. 1The proposed model
Fig. 2BLS features
Descriptive data of the constructs
| Constructs | Mean | Std. Deviation | Skewness | Kurtosis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TSE | 4.584 | 0.970 | -0.504 | 0.122 |
| ANX | 4.084 | 1.421 | -0.658 | -0.507 |
| ENJ | 4.681 | 0.931 | -0.721 | 0.936 |
| FC | 4.323 | 0.980 | -0.273 | 0.113 |
| PV | 4.034 | 1.092 | -0.199 | 0.053 |
| LG | 4.975 | 0.751 | -0.393 | -0.234 |
| PEU | 4.205 | 1.083 | -0.361 | 0.089 |
| PU | 4.348 | 1.016 | -0.430 | 0.412 |
| CI | 4.373 | 0.977 | -0.434 | 0.373 |
| AU | 3.800 | 1.384 | -0.060 | -0.840 |
TSE, technology self-efficacy; ANX, technology anxiety; ENJ, perceived enjoyment; FC, facilitating conditions; PV, price value; LG, learning goal orientation; PEU, perceived ease of use; PU, perceived usefulness; CI, continuance intention; AU, actual use
Discriminant validity of the constructs
| TSE | ANX | ENJ | FC | PV | LG | PEU | PU | CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TSE | |||||||||
| ANX | -0.161** | ||||||||
| ENJ | 0.541** | -0.054 | |||||||
| FC | 0.450** | -0.183** | 0.627** | ||||||
| PV | 0.366** | -0.264** | 0.575** | 0.610** | |||||
| LG | 0.398** | -0.113** | 0.478** | 0.369** | 0.372** | ||||
| PEU | 0.409** | -0.259** | 0.498** | 0.545** | 0.623** | 0.377** | |||
| PU | 0.429** | -0.293** | 0.630** | 0.566** | 0.665** | 0.423** | 0.763** | ||
| CI | 0.399** | -0.226** | 0.579** | 0.551** | 0.668** | 0.408** | 0.648** | 0.774** |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01
The diagonal items represent the discriminant index
Results of the measurement model
| Construct | Items | Loading | CR | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perceived ease of use | PEU1 | 0.794 | 0.937 | 0.789 |
| PEU2 | 0.905 | |||
| PEU3 | 0.939 | |||
| PEU4 | 0.909 | |||
| Perceived usefulness | PU1 | 0.915 | 0.969 | 0.861 |
| PU2 | 0.930 | |||
| PU3 | 0.942 | |||
| PU4 | 0.926 | |||
| PU5 | 0.926 | |||
| Technology anxiety | ANX1 | 0.938 | 0.951 | 0.795 |
| ANX2 | 0.941 | |||
| ANX3 | 0.827 | |||
| ANX4 | 0.859 | |||
| ANX5 | 0.889 | |||
| Technology self-efficacy | SE1 | 0.825 | 0.936 | 0.747 |
| SE2 | 0.837 | |||
| SE3 | 0.917 | |||
| SE4 | 0.874 | |||
| SE5 | 0.865 | |||
| Enjoyment | ENJ1 | 0.852 | 0.954 | 0.807 |
| ENJ2 | 0.936 | |||
| ENJ3 | 0.949 | |||
| ENJ4 | 0.888 | |||
| ENJ5 | 0.862 | |||
| Facilitating conditions | FC1 | 0.802 | 0.857 | 0.602 |
| FC2 | 0.860 | |||
| FC3 | 0.739 | |||
| FC4 | 0.692 | |||
| Price value | PV1 | 0.799 | 0.919 | 0.694 |
| PV2 | 0.849 | |||
| PV3 | 0.852 | |||
| PV4 | 0.816 | |||
| PV5 | 0.847 | |||
| Learning goal orientation | LG1 | 0.827 | 0.890 | 0.619 |
| LG2 | 0.783 | |||
| LG3 | 0.805 | |||
| LG4 | 0.806 | |||
| LG5 | 0.709 | |||
| Continuance intention | CI1 | 0.897 | 0.946 | 0.814 |
| CI2 | 0.881 | |||
| CI3 | 0.920 | |||
| CI4 | 0.911 |
Fig. 3Results of the final model
Results of the hypotheses
| Hypothesis | Path | Result | |
|---|---|---|---|
| H1a | PU → CI | 0.563*** | Supported |
| H1b | PEU → CI | 0.026 | Not supported |
| H1c | PEU → PU | 0.494*** | Supported |
| H1d | CI → AU | 0.513*** | Supported |
| H2a | TSE → PU | -0.006 | Not supported |
| H2b | TSE → PEU | 0.079 | Not supported |
| H3a | ENJ → PU | 0.271*** | Supported |
| H3b | ENJ → PEU | 0.085 | Not supported |
| H4a | ANX → PU | -0.103*** | Supported |
| H4b | ANX → PEU | -0.154*** | Supported |
| H5a | LG → PEU | 0.127* | Supported |
| H5b | LG → CI | 0.060 | Not supported |
| H6a | FC → PEU | 0.434*** | Supported |
| H7a | PV → PU | 0.211*** | Supported |
| H7b | ANX → CI | 0.295*** | Supported |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001
Results of the structural model
| Perceived ease of use | Perceived usefulness | Continuance intention | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direct effects | Indirect effects | Direct effects | Indirect effects | Total effects | Direct effects | Indirect effects | Total effects | |
| Technology anxiety | -0.154*** | – | -0.103*** | -0.076** | -0.179*** | – | -0.105*** | -0.105*** |
| Technology self-efficacy | 0.079 | – | -0.006 | 0.039 | 0.033 | – | 0.021 | 0.021 |
| Perceived enjoyment | 0.085 | – | 0.271*** | 0.042 | 0.313*** | – | 0.179*** | 0.179*** |
| Facilitating conditions | 0.434*** | – | – | 0.215*** | 0.215*** | – | 0.132*** | 0.132*** |
| Learning goal orientation | 0.127* | – | – | 0.063* | 0.063* | 0.060 | 0.039* | 0.098** |
| Price value | – | – | 0.211*** | – | 0.211*** | 0.295*** | 0.119** | 0.413*** |
| Perceived ease of use | – | – | 0.494*** | – | 0.494*** | 0.026 | 0.278*** | 0.305*** |
| Perceived usefulness | – | – | – | – | – | 0.563*** | – | 0.569*** |
| R2 | 0.433*** | – | 0.712*** | – | – | 0.696*** | – | – |
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001