A STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODEL OF THE DETERMINANTS AFFECTING STUDENTS’ BEHAVIORAL INTENTION AND SATISFACTION TOWARDS BLENDED LEARNING OF ENGLISH AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE AT A BANGKOK PUBLIC UNIVERSITY
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research intends to investigate the determinants based on the integration of Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). By integrating TPB and TAM, the researcher developed a conceptual model of the relationships between factors that affected behavioral intention and satisfaction towards using Google Classroom as a blended learning system in an EFL course. The research was conducted in a Bangkok Public University, with 354 first-year undergraduate EFL students who enrolled in the English foundation course via an online questionnaire. The Structural Equation Model (SEM) was employed for hypotheses testing. The result revealed 7 interesting determinants which had significant positive effects with Behavioral Intention (BI) and Satisfaction (S) to use Google Classroom as a blended learning system in an EFL course; 1) Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU), 2) Perceived Behavior Control (PBC), 3) Subjective Norm (SN), 4) Computer Self-Efficacy (CSE), 4) Social Presence (SP), 5) Collaborative Learning (CL), 6) Facilitating Conditions (FC), and 7) Task-Technology Fit (TTF). In addition, the research found that all 8 determinants had a significant positive direct effect on behavioral intention. The strongest direct effect is TTF ( = 0.748, p-value = 0.000). Moreover, PEOU, SP, CL, FC, and TTF had a positive direct effect on satisfaction. The strongest direct effect is TTF (
= 0.771, p-value = 0.000). Furthermore, CSE was the only determinant which a had significant indirect effect on both behavioral intention (
= 0.275) and satisfaction (
= 0.289). In SEM, the goodness of fit indices met seven specified criteria of model fit acceptance (
2/df = 1.647, RMSEA = 0.043, SRMR = 0.033, NNFI = 0.938, TLI = 0.961, CFI = 0.974, and GFI = 0.929). The result indicated a strong fit between the structural model and the data.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The owner of the article does not copy or violate any of its copyright. If any copyright infringement occurs or prosecution, in any case, the Editorial Board is not involved in all the rights to the owner of the article to be performed.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Al-Azawei, A., Parslow, P., & Lundqvist, K. (2017). Investigating the effect of learning styles in a blended e-learning system: An extension of the technology acceptance model (TAM). Australasian Journal of Education Technology, 33(2), 1-23.
Banyen, W., Viriyavejakul, C., & Ratanaolarn, T. (2016). A blended learning model for learning achievement enhancement of thai undergraduate students. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 11(04), 48-55.
Bokolo, A., Kamaludin, A., Romli, A., Mat Raffei, A. F., A/L Eh Phon, D. N., Abdullah, A., ... & Baba, S. (2020). Predictors of blended learning deployment in institutions of higher learning: Theory of planned behavior perspective. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 37(4), 179-196.
Chen, Y. C. (2014). An empirical examination of factors affecting college students’ proactive stickiness with a web-based English learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 31(1), 159-171.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
Dennis, N. K. (2011). Development of a blended online learning approach model for English for careers in Technology at Ubon Ratchathani Rajabhat University (Doctoral dissertation). Nakhon Ratchasima: Suranaree University of Technology.
Dudeney, G., & Hockey, N. (2007). How to teach English with technology. Harlow, UK: Pearson Longman.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention & behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 213-236.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (Vol. 6). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
Iftakhar, S. (2016). Google classroom: What works and how? Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 3(2), 12-18.
Laohajaratsang, T. (2010). e-Education in Thailand: Equity, quality and sensitivity for learners and teachers. In Z. Abas, I. Jung & J. Luca (Eds.), Proceedings of Global Learn Asia Pacific 2010--Global Conference on Learning and Technology, 694-700.
Mei, B., Brown, G., & Teo, T. (2017). Toward an understanding of preservice English as a foreign language teachers’ acceptance of computer-assisted language learning 2.0 in the People’s Republic of China. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(1), 74-104.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pappas, C. (2015). Google classroom review: Pros and cons of using google classroom in eLearning. Retrieved October 13, 2020, from https://elearningindustry.com/google-classroom-review-pros-and-cons-of-using-google-classroom-in-elearning
Park, S. Y. (2009). An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding university students’ behavioral intention to use e-learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12, 150–162.
Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7, 68-88.
Soper, D. (2020). Free statistics calculators. Retrieved December 23, 2020, from https://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc/calculator.aspx?id=89
Sorden, S., & Munene, I. (2013). Constructs related to community college student satisfaction in blended learning. Journal of Information Technology Education, 12, 251-270.
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Decomposition and crossover effects in the theory of planned behavior: A study of consumer adoption intentions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12, 137–155.
Teo, T. (2009). The impact of subjective norm and facilitating conditions on preservice teachers’ attitude toward computer use: A structural equation modeling of an extended technology acceptance model. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40, 89–109.
Yutdhana, S. (2005). Design-based research in CALL. CALL Research Perspectives, 169-178.
Zhang, Y. G., & Dang, M. Y. (2020). Understanding essential factors in influencing technology-supported learning: A model toward blended learning success. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 19, 489-510.