SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 1

Examining University Students Acceptance of Learning Objects according to Learning Object Acceptance Model

Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Öğrenme Nesneleri Kullanımlarının Öğrenme Nesnesi Kabul Modeline Göre İncelenmesi

G. Alev ÖZKÖK
M. Emin AKPOLAT
Pages
215–238
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

When the findings related to the scale adapted to Turkish within the scope of the study were examined, it was found that Learning Object Acceptance Model (LOAM) was composed of 35 items with 7 factors.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to identify variables that affect the students' tendency to use learning objects, which are teaching materials in their online learning environments, and to examine the causal relationships between these variables.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study group consisted of 427 university freshman.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When the findings related to the scale adapted to Turkish within the scope of the study were examined, it was found that Learning Object Acceptance Model (LOAM) was composed of 35 items with 7 factors.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of this study is to identify variables that affect the students' tendency to use learning objects, which are teaching materials in their online learning environments, and to examine the causal relationships between these variables. The study group consisted of 427 university freshman. The Learning Object Acceptance Model (LOAM), an extended version of the Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1989) developed by Lau and Woods (2008a), has been adapted to Turkish and used in the study. When the findings related to the scale adapted to Turkish within the scope of the study were examined, it was found that Learning Object Acceptance Model (LOAM) was composed of 35 items with 7 factors. LOAM consists of; “pedagogical quality”, “technical quality”, “content quality”; external factors and “perceived usefulness”, “perceived ease of use”, “behavioral intention", “actual use”, main factors. The general Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of the scale was 0.93. The research model was tested with the Structural Equation Model (SEM) developed using LISREL 8.0. As a result of the research, the findings show that the perceived usefulness is a direct determinant and perceived ease of use is an indirect determinant of intention to use learning objects. The perceived ease of use does not seem to have an immediate influence on the direct intention to use learning objects.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, üniversite öğrencilerinin çevrimiçi öğrenme ortamlarının öğretim materyalleri olan öğrenme nesnelerini kullanma eğilimlerine etki eden değişkenleri tespit etmek ve bu değişkenler arasındaki nedensel ilişkileri incelemektir. Çalışma grubu 427 üniversite birinci sınıf öğrencisinden oluşmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, Lau ve Woods (2008a) tarafından geliştirilen Teknoloji Kabul Modelinin (Davis, 1989) genişletilmiş versiyonu olan Öğrenme Nesnesi Kabul Modeli-ÖNKM (Learning Object Acceptance Model - LOAM) Türkçe'ye uyarlanarak araştırmada kullanılmıştır. Araştırma kapsamında Türkçe’ye uyarlanan ölçeğe ilişkin bulgular incelendiğinde, Öğrenme Nesnesi Kabul Ölçeği’nin (ÖNKÖ), 35 madde ve 7 faktörden oluştuğu bulunmuştur. ÖNKÖ; “pedagojik kalite”, “teknik kalite” ve “içerik kalitesi” harici değişkenleri ile “yarar algısı”, “kullanım kolaylığı algısı”, “davranışsal niyet” ve “gerçek kullanım” asıl değişkenlerinden oluşmuştur. Ölçeğin genel Cronbach Alfa güvenirlik katsayısı 0,93 olarak elde edilmiştir. Araştırma modeli LISREL 8.0 kullanılarak oluşturulan yapısal eşitlik modeli (YEM) ile sınanmıştır. Araştırmanın bulguları, yarar algısının doğrudan ve kullanım kolaylığı algısının dolaylı olarak öğrenme nesnelerinin kullanım niyetinin belirleyicileri olduğunu göstermektedir. Kullanım kolaylığı algısının, öğrenme nesneleri kullanımı için doğrudan niyet üzerinde bir etkisi olmadığı görülmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZKÖK, G. A., AKPOLAT, M. E. (2022). Examining University Students Acceptance of Learning Objects according to Learning Object Acceptance Model. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 1, 215–238. https://ajindex.com/articles/531467

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you're having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665-694. doi:10.2307/3250951 Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Akkoyunlu, B., & Yılmaz Soylu, M. (2008). A study of student’s perceptions in a blended learning environment based on different learning styles. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 183-193.
  2. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1984). The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices or maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika, 49, 155-173.
  3. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1998). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.
  4. Bailey, J. E. & Pearson, S. W. (1983). Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Management Science, 29(5), 530-545.
  5. Bannan-Ritland, B., Dabbagh, N., & Murphy, K., (2000). Learning object systems as constructivist learning environments: Related assumptions, theories, and applications. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects. Bloomington, IN. Bratina, T. A., Hayes, D., & Blumsack, S. L. (2002). Preparing teachers to use learning objects. 6 Haziran 2018 tarihinde https://www.kisa.link/Lag0 adresinden erişildi. Brown, T.A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. ABD: Guilford Press.
  6. Burton-Jones, A., & Hubona, G. S. (2006). The mediation of external variables in the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43(6), 706-717.
  7. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Akgün, Ö., Kahveci, Ö., & Demirel, F. (2004). Güdülenme ve öğrenme stratejileri ölçeği’nin Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 4(2), 207-239.
  8. Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cain, R. (2000). Strategies for helping liberal arts students become more active learners online. The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 6(1), 9796-9798.
  9. Carswell, A. D., & Venkatesh, V. (2002). Learner outcomes in an asynchronous distance education environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 56(5), 475-494.
  10. Chang, C. Y., Sheu, J. P., & Chan, T. W. (2003). Concept and design of ad hoc and mobile classrooms. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 336-346.