Evaluating Students’ Acceptance of the Discussion Forum in the E-Learning Context

Recently, the popularity of e-learning systems has been growing in the academic and technical training world. Some academic and technical training organizations are adopting e-learning systems to support distance education, while others use these systems to supplement their traditional way of teaching. This pilot study evaluated the students’ acceptance of the use of discussion forum in the context of using e-learning system as a supplementary tool, based on the technology acceptance model (TAM2). Data was collected through a questionnaire from undergraduate students in an academic institution in Oman. This study found that perceived usefulness is significantly determined by job relevance, image, result demonstrability and perceived ease of use of the system, but not by subjective norm and output quality. In addition, the use of the discussion forum in the e-learning context is determined by its perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. INTRODUCTION Recently, the adoption of e-learning systems has been growing in the academic world. In 2004, the e-learning market was worth more than US $18 billion worldwide (Saady, 2005). In the Middle East, e-learning projects are expected to exceed a compound average growth rate of 32% by 2008, based on the Madar research group (Saady, 2005). Several international reports from the World Bank (2003) and the World Summit on the Information Society (2005) emphasized that the use of information communication technology (ICT), to build human resources is a vital prerequisite for the development of knowledge-based economy especially for developing country. To be able to succeed on the deployment of e-learning systems, it is very essential to understand the determinants of this technology’s acceptance. The technology’s acceptance can be assessed at macro level (organizations or governments) or micro level (students and instructors). This study aimed to investigate this phenomenon from the students’ perspective. Factors affecting information system usage are best investigated at the individual users’ level (DeLone & McLean, 2002). Evaluating individual users’ acceptance of the e-learning systems is a “basic marketing element” (Kelly & Bauer, 2004). Middle Eastern organizations are hesitant to adopt e-learning systems because of the limited Individual users’ acceptance (Saady, 2005). This study empirically examined factors that enhances students acceptance of e-learning initiative (specifically the use of discussion forum). Discussion forum is an online discussion group where people with similar interests engage in discussion, share and debate ideas. This study adopted Technology Acceptance Model (TAM2), which was proposed by Venkatesh and Davis (2000). The next section provides a literature review of e-learning and technology acceptance models. The literature section is followed by sections on study framework, study methodology, data analysis, and discussion and conclusions. LITERATURE REVIEW E-Learning E-learning is defined as “instruction delivered through purely digital technology using the Internet or private networks” (Laudon & Laudon, 2003, p. 268). It is the use of a web-based communication, collaboration, learning, knowledge transfer and training to add values to the learners and the businesses (Kelly & Bauer, 2004). Some academic and technical training institutions adopt the e-learning system to support distance learning, while others adopt this technology as a supplementary tool to their traditional way of teaching. E-learning provides several benefits for individuals and organizations. Such benefits are cost-effectiveness, consistency, timely content, flexible accessibility and customer value (Cantoni, Cellario & Porta, 2004; Kelly & Bauer, 2004). However, e-learning may cost a lot to develop, requires new skills on content producers and requires more responsibility and self-discipline from the learners (Cantoni et al, 2004); thus students might be intimidated to use the e-learning systems. Thus, understanding the determinants of the learners’ acceptance of the e-learning systems is vital to the promotion and exploitation of these systems. Limited studies investigated the e-learning acceptance such as those of Ashrafi, Al-Moharby and Salman (2005) and Abouchedid and Eid (2004). However, these studies assessed the instructors’ acceptance of e-learning systems. Some Western studies empirically investigated the students’ acceptance of e-learning. For instance, Roca and colleagues (2006) found that Information quality, ease of use, perceived usefulness, information quality, service quality and system quality determine the students’ satisfaction and consequently their e-learning continuous intention. Gotthardt and colleagues (2006) indicated the success of e-learning strategy depends on content quality, system and content flexibility, system ease of use and others. Nevertheless, these two studies evaluated the individuals’ acceptance of the entire e-learning system. However, an e-learning system incorporates various tools (such as online quizzes, files upload/download, chat rooms, discussion forums, instant messaging and email, quizzes, surveys etc.) that have diverse features. Thus, the determinants of these tools’ acceptance may be different. Technology Acceptance User acceptance is a multidimensional attitude affected by various technical and social factors (Bailey & Pearson, 1983; DeLone & McLean, 2002). Technology acceptance has been assessed in the literature based on perceived usefulness, user’s satisfaction, intention to use, and actual usage of the technology. Various frameworks, such as those of Bailey and Pearson (1983), Davis et al. (1989), Doll and Torkzadeh (1998), DeLone and McLean (2002), investigate the determinants of this individuals’ acceptance. Baily and Pearson’ and Delone and McLean’s models focus mostly on the effects of information system’s technical characteristics on IS effectiveness. However, discussion forum is a knowledge exchange tool. Knowledge management (KM) is a social and technical process (Scholl, Konig, Meyer & Heisig, 2004). Thus, investigating the social factors is as important as the technical factors. Venkatesh and Davis’s TAM2 model (2000) is more suitable because it focuses on social and technical factors to measure the user’s acceptance of information technology. Figure 1 illustrates this model. TAM was originally developed in 1989 based on the theory of reasoned action (TRA) in psychology, and was extended in 2000 (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). Based on TAM2, user acceptance is determined by two factors: perceived usefulness (the extent to which a person perceives that using the system will improve his or her work performance), and perceived ease of use (the degree to which a person believes that using the system will be effortless). According to TAM, the effects of external variables on the intention to use are mediated by perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use; perceived ease of use also directly affects the perceived usefulness. TAM2 extends the external variables to include social influences (subjective norm, voluntaries and image) and cognitive influences (job 508 2007 IRMA International Conference Copyright © 2007, Idea Group Inc. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of Idea Group Inc. is prohibited. relevance, output quality, result demonstrability and perceived ease of use). The study framework section below provides more discussion on TAM2 model. STUDY FRAMEWORK This study examined the factors that determine the students’ acceptance of the discussion forum use in the e-learning system based on TAM2. Figure 2 illustrates the study framework. This study did not measure voluntariness because the use of the system in the participating sample is discretionary not mandatory. Experience was also excluded because to test the moderation effect of experience, a larger sample size is needed. Based on TAM2, there are several factors that may contribute to the perceived usefulness of an information system (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). These factors are subjective norm, image, job relevance, and output quality and result demonstrability. Subjective norm and image are two social influences that may affect the perceived usefulness of a system. Subjective norm is defined as the individual’s perception that most people who are important to him think he or she should or should not do a specific behavior (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). The rationale behind this effect is that a person tends to conduct a behavior just because other important contacts (superiors or colleagues) believe s/he should do it even s/he is not favoring doing it. Very limited studies investigated the influence of subjective norm on IS acceptance; one of these studies that found a significant relationship is Taylor and Todd (1995). Image is another social factor that affect perceived usefulness. Image is the degree to which an individual believe the use of an innovation will improve one’s position in one’s social system (Moore & Benbasat, 1991). Thus, an individual may perceive that the use of a specific system is useful because its usage enhances his image. TAM2 also theorizes that subjective norm affect image because if important figures in one’s social network believe s/he should conduct a behavior, then conducting it will enhance his/her standing in the social group. Thus, the study hypothesized: Hypothesis 1: Subjective norm improves perceived usefulness of the discussion forum in the e-learning context. Hypothesis 2: Image improves perceived usefulness of the discussion forum in the e-learning context. Hypothesis 3: Subjective norm improves image. TAM2 also theorizes that four “cognitive instrumental” factors determine perceived usefulness; they are job relevance, result demonstrability, output quality and perceived ease of use. Based on TAM2, people perceive the system’s usefulness by cognitively comparing system’s ca