Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 11

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm


Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

The Acceptance of E-learning as a Tool for


Teaching and Learning in Libyan Higher
Education
Ali Mohamed Elkaseh1, Kok Wai Wong2, and Chun Che Fung3
1

PHD student , School of Engineering and Information Technology, Murdoch University, Perth, Australia
Associate Professor, School of Engineering and Information Technology, Murdoch University, Australia.

Associate Professor, School of Engineering and Information Technology, Murdoch University, Australia

ABSTRACT
The integration of e-learning platforms in higher education system has changed the process of acquiring and disseminating of
knowledge among students and teachers. A number of studies have shown that e-learning adoption is not simply a technical
solution, but a procedure of many diverse factors such as behavioural and social contexts. Yet little is known about the
significant role of such factors in acceptance and the use of e-learning in developing country like Libya. Therefore, the main
purpose of this study was to investigate the factors that affect e-learning implementation in Libyan higher education for
teaching and learning by extending the Technology Acceptance model (TAM) to include Social Influence (SI) and Perceived
Enjoyment (PE). A quantitative research method was employed in this study. To examine the hypothesized research model,
data was collected from a sample of teachers and students from four universities in the Libyan higher educational sector via
questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed utilizing Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) technique based on AMOS
methods. The results reveal that perceived enjoyment has a significant direct effect on teachers perceived ease of use and
perceived usefulness of e-learning. On the other hand, perceived enjoyment has a significant direct effect on students
perceived ease of use only. The results also reveal that social influence has a direct effect on students perceived ease of use and
perceived usefulness of e-learning, but no significant direct effect on the teachers' perceived ease of use and perceived
usefulness of e-learning.

Keyword: Libyan Higher education, Social influence, perceived enjoyment, E-learning

1. INTRODUCTION
In the last two decades, with the utilization of the World Wide Web (WWW), higher educational institutions have been
investing in information technology systems to enhance both traditional and e-learning courses [1], [2]. While the elearning is believed as a worldwide technology, the effectiveness of e-learning tool should be assessed locally due to
the local contexts in the country [3]. This is more important particularly in developing countries such as Libya where
universities and other higher educational institutions are still using traditional education method due to the lack of
efficient technological infrastructure or trained staff [4], which in turn influence the acceptance and the use of
technology in these countries. Libyan higher education still faces many challenges to implement e-learning technology
in teaching and learning. The challenges are related to cultural and linguistic, awareness and attitudes of students and
teachers towards e-learning, the lack of efficient technological infrastructure, and the shortage of curriculum
development for e-learning [5]. However, the factors of successfully implementing e-learning technology in Libyas
higher education are not well defined and studied. Therefore, this research will fill this gap by analysing the
experience, perceptions and intention of teachers and students on using e-learning, as well as investigating and
providing an understanding of the factors that impact on the implementation of e-Learning for higher education in
Libya.
The successful implementation of e-learning depends on the users' perception, and also skills and knowledge in using
computer. Such important factors have been presented to influence users initial acceptance of information and
communication technology and their behavior in terms of the use of e-learning system [6], [7]. Because of its
admissible explanatory power and popularity, several studies have applied the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in
the technology acceptance and implementation, in the information system area [8] and particularly in e-learning
context [9].
The main aims of the current study is to investigate the factors that affect the acceptance and use of e-learning as
learning and teaching tools in Libyan higher education. Through Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the two
factors that impact behavior intention to use e-learning as a tool for teaching and learning were tested. These factors

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Page 1

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)


A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm


Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

include: Perceived Enjoyment, and Social Influence. According to the study conducted by Elkaseh, et al. [10], it was
found that the Social Influence is one of the critical success factors of implementing e-learning in higher education.
Wu, et al. [11] mentioned that Perceived Enjoyment (PE) should be taken into account to increase the satisfaction of elearning system.
The paper is structured as follows: the next section will discuss the research model and hypotheses. The research
methodology was discussed in section three. Section four describes the data analysis techniques and results. Finally,
conclusions and discussions will be presented.

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
This study proposes and examines a conceptual model for the acceptance of e-learning technology based on TAM,
drawing from prior literature that utilized this in educational research. Furthermore, the model extends TAM through
the inclusion of Social Influence and Perceived Enjoyment as supplementary predictor variables. The conceptual model
is shown in Figure 1 and the following sections justify and explain each of the predicted relationships based on the
previous results from the literature.

2.1 Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU), and Perceived Usefulness (PU)


Many researchers have utilized the TAM to assess the user's acceptance of e-learning [12]-[14]. In TAM, Perceived
Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness are two variables which are affecting the Behavioural Intentions to Use a system
[15]. It was also found that the Perceived Ease of Use have a positive effect on the perceived usefulness [16]. The
relationship between the Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use have been discovered by a number of studies
[17]. High degree of Perceived Usefulness (PU) leads to more positive Attitude Towards Use (ATU) [18]. Venkatesh
and Davis [19] mentioned that if the users feel that the system is very easy to use, they will perceive usefulness more.
Some researchers showed that attitude towards systems use is supposed to mediate the impact of Perceived Usefulness
and Perceived Ease of Use on behavioral intention [20]. Additionally, Teo [21] and Seif, et al. [22] also found direct
impact between Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Attitude Towards Use in the context of accepting e-learning, and the
factors that affect teachers and students to use the technology. Therefore, this study examines the relationship between
these factors.
H5a: Perceived Ease of Use has a positive effect on students Attitude Towards Behaviour of an e-learning in Libyan
higher education.
H5b: Perceived Ease of Use has a positive effect on teachers Attitude Towards Behaviour of an e-learning in Libyan
higher education.
H6a: Perceived Usefulness has a positive effect on students Attitude Towards Behaviour of an e-learning in Libyan
higher education.
H6b: Perceived Usefulness has a positive effect on teachers Attitude Towards Behaviour of an e-learning in Libyan
higher education.

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Page 2

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)


A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm


Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

2.2 Attitude Towards Use (ATU)


Attitude is defined as a person's positive or negative feeling about performing the targeted behaviour [23]. Attitude
Towards Usage (ATU) refers to the the degree to which an individual evaluates and associates the target system with
his or her job (Davis, 1993). Awareness goes along with attitude and positive attitude towards ICT is widely
recognized as a necessary condition for the effective implementation [24]. Rhema, et al. [25] stated that e-learning
success is affected by different types of factors including users' attitudes towards e-learning as well as their satisfaction
with using technology during teaching/learning experience. Moreover, research has shown that knowledge of the
educators attitude of the technology and its influence on their job helps in developing more appropriate technology
training programs for teaching. This also facilitate better technology-integration with the pedagogy [26]. Adoption or
usage of technology heavily depends on a positive Attitude Toward Use and the Behavioral Intention to Use the system
[27]-[29]. Similarly, there are strong relationships between educators attitude and their success in using technology for
learning [30]. Research has shown that the more positive Attitude Toward to Use the new technology, provides greater
Intention to Use it [29], [31]. A study conducted by Elkaseh, et al. [10] found that the attitude is one of the critical
success factors of implementing e-learning in higher education. Successfully e-learning adoption requires users to have
a positive attitude towards it [32]. Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed (the null hypotheses present no
influence):
H7a: Attitude Towards Behaviour influences students Behavioural Intention to Use e-learning in Libyan higher
education.
H7b: Attitude Towards Behaviour influences teachers Behavioural Intention to Use e-learning in Libyan higher
education.
2.3 Perceived Enjoyment PE
People participate in activities due to these activities bring enjoyment and pleasure [33]. Perceived Enjoyment is
defined as the extent to which the activity of using the technology is perceived to be enjoyable in its own right, apart
from any performance consequences that may be anticipated [34]. PE is referred to as an intrinsic motivation variable
to use an information system. Many studies on PE has observed that PE positively affects intention to use computers
[35]. E-learning is an activity for learning through the computer. Hence, it suggest to use PE as one of the variables
that affects the intent to accept e-learning. Earlier researches on technology acceptance behaviour tests the influence of
Perceived Enjoyment on Perceived Ease of Use [36]. Acorrding to Venkatesh [37], Perceived Enjoyment (PE) is one of
the vital factors that have been created in the determinants of Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU). Moreover, many of the
research emphasized the importance of Perceived Enjoyment [38]-[40]. The results of Huang, et al. [41] show that
Perceived Enjoyment has a significant effect on Perceived Ease of Use and can expect user intentions of utilizing elearning. Therefore, the following are the suggested hypothesis.
H1a: Perceived Enjoyment has a positive impact on students Perceived Usefulness of e-learning in Libyan higher
education.
H1b: Perceived Enjoyment has a positive impact on teachers Perceived Usefulness of e-learning in Libyan higher
education.
H2a: Perceived Enjoyment has a positive impact on students perceived Ease of Use of e-learning in Libyan higher
education.
H2b: Perceived Enjoyment has a positive impact on teachers Perceived Ease of Use of e-learning in Libyan higher
education.
2.4 Social Influences (SI)
According to Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) [23], a person's performance of a specified behaviours is identified by
their Behavioural Intention (BI) to perform the behaviour. This variable (BI) is jointly determined by the individual's
(AU) and Social Influence (SI). SI is defined as the individual's perception that majority of people who are important to
him/her think he/she should/should not perform behaviour in question. SI was investigated in some studies as an
antecedent of Behavioral Intention (BI) and in other research as an antecedent Perceived Usefulness (PU) [42].
However, Venkatesh, et al. [43] mentioned that the influence of Social Influence SI is very complex. In literature, there
was inconsistency about the effect of Social Influence on the intention to accept and use the technology. For instance,
many researchers found a important influence of SI on BI [43]-[45] , whereas a number of other researchers failed to
find any influence [46], [47]. Social Influence has been utilized by many researchers as significant factor in examining
the behavioral intention of utilization e-learning system [10], [13], [29]. Lee [48] mentioned that Social Influence has
significantly impacted on perceived usefulness. Therefore, the following are the suggested hypothesis.

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Page 3

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)


Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm
Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015


H3a: Social
education.
H3b: Social
education.
H4a: Social
education.
H4b: Social
education.

Influence has a positive impact on students Perceived Usefulness of e-learning in Libyan higher
Influence has a positive impact on teachers Perceived Usefulness of e-learning in Libyan higher
Influence has a positive impact on students Perceived Ease of Use of e-learning in Libyan higher
Influence has a positive impact on teachers Perceived Ease of Use of e-learning in Libyan higher

3. Research Methodology
Self-administered questionnaire was conducted in order to identify the factors that influence the students and teachers
behavioural intention toward using e-learning as learning and teaching tools. The population in the study consists of
students and teachers from Libyan Higher education. The sampling of the self-administered survey was described as
follows: participants were recruited from four universities: two private and two public universities. These universities
had been chosen for the following reasons:
1- These universities reflect the geographical diversity in Libya, where two of them are in urban areas and two of
them from rural areas.
2- For public universities, University of Tripoli and Elmergib University had been chosen because they were larger
universities in the region and they had students coming from all surrounding areas thus covering a large
geographical area.
3- Private universities had been chosen because they are under different funding system.
The proportion of the students and teachers obtained from each university is not important, since the minimum sample
size was achieved. The target population in this research was the students and teachers from four universities: two
public and two private from Libyan higher education. Therefore 400 student questionnaires and 400 teachers
questionnaires were distributed to the students and teachers in the four universities. From the 400 questionnaires
distributed to the students, 318 were returned in a form eligible for the analysis and 27 questionnaires were discarded
because they were missing data due to lack of completeness by the participants. The overall student response rate for
this study is 79.5%. From the 400 questionnaires distributed to the teachers, 182 were returned in a form eligible for
the analysis and 7 questionnaires were discarded because they were also missing data, as a result of lack of
completeness by the participants. The overall teachers responses rate for this study was 45.5%. The questionnaire were
analysed using version 21 of the Statistical Package for Social Program (SSPS) and Analysis of Moment Structure
(AMOS) Version 21 was used for Structural Equation Modelling.

4. Data Analysis and Results


Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS) Version 21 was used for hypotheses testing. A two-stage approach was
conducted to analyse the data in this research. First, the measurement model was estimated to validate the validity and
reliability of the fit of the constructs. Second, the structural model was estimated utilizing hypotheses testing. The
estimation of the measurement model and structural model was conducted using Maximum Likelihood Estimation
(MLE).
4.1 Demographic Statistics
Table 1 Summaries Characteristics of Respondents from Age, Gender, University Type, Year of Teaching, and use elearning as a Learning Tool
Table 1: Demographic Profile of students and teachers

Age

18-29 years
30-49 years
50+
Total1

Gender

Male
Female

University Type

Private
Public

Total

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Student
Frequency
299
17
1

(%)
94.3%
5.3%
.3%

Teacher
Frequency
49
88
45

(%)
26.9
48.4
24.7

317
114
204

35.8
64.2

182
113
69

100.0
62.1
37.9

318
82
236

25.8
74.2

182
26
156

14.3
85.7

Page 4

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)


Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm
Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015


Total
Year of teaching

0-5 years
6-10 years
+10 years

Use e-learning as
Learning Tool

Yes
No

318

182
89
38
35

Total

Total2

144
172
316

45.3
54.1

182
90
92
182

48.9
20.9
30.2
49.5
50.5

One respondent did not answer


Two respondents did not answer
As illustrated in Table 1, regarding the age, the largest category of students was those between 18-29 years of age
(94.3%), followed by those in the 30 to 49 age range (5.3%). There was only one respondent who was 50 or over in age.
While teachers who aged between 18-29 years (26.9%). Teachers who aged between 30-49 years (48.4%), and 24.7%
teachers were aged 50 or over.
Regarding the gender, female students are slightly higher in number than male students at a percentage of 64.2 and
35.8, respectively, while the male teachers are slightly higher in number than male students at a percentage of 62.1 and
37.9, respectively.
In terms of university type, both public students and teachers are higher in number than private students and teachers
at percentages of students at 74.2, 85.7 and teachers at 25.8, 14.3, respectively.
Regarding year of teaching, teachers who teach from 0-5 years ranked highest at (48.9), while teachers who teach
between 6-10 years and over 10 years with a percentage of 20.9 and 30.2 respectively.
When asked about the use of e-learning as a tool for teaching and learning, both students and teachers with experience
are higher than those who never use e-learning with percentages of 54.1 compared to 45.3 and 50.5 compared to 49.5
respectively.
2

4.2 Measurement Model


The power of the measurement model is identified by its reliability and validity. Cronbach's Alpha was utilized to
measure the reliability value of each construct. The reliability value of each construct is shown in Tables 2 and 3. All
reliability values are greater than 0.7 which are considered to be in the admissible range. The convergent validity was
measured by the testing of composite reliability and Average Variance Extracted (AVE). The data shows that the
measures are strong in term of their internal consistency reliability. All the composite reliabilities are higher than 0.7
which are considered to be in the acceptable range.
Table 2: Construct reliability for student
Factor
Social Influence

Perceived Enjoment

Perceived Ease of Use

Perceived Usefulness

Attitude

Behavioral Intention

Item
S1
S2
S3
Enj1
Enj2
Enj3
EASE1
EASE2
EASE3
EASE4
USEF3
USEF4
USEF5
ATT3
ATT4
ATT5
INT1
INT2
INT3

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Factor Loading
0.737
0.851
0.827
0.859
0.847
0.675
0.675
0.831
0.659
0.745
0.541
0.810
0.807
0.691
0.737
0.730
0.778
0.713
0.878

CR
0. 848

AVE
0.651

Cronbachs alpha
0.846

0.838

0.636

0.834

0.819

0.533

0.828

0.768

0.533

0.770

0.763

0.517

0.768

0.831

0.623

0.832

Page 5

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)


Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm
Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Table 3 : Construct reliability for teachers


Factor
Social Influence

Item
S1
S3
S4
Enj1
Enj4
Enj5
EASE1
EASE3
EASE4
USEF2
USEF3
USEF5
ATT2
ATT3
ATT5
INT1
INT3
INT4

Perceived Enjoment

Perceived Ease of Use

Perceived Usefulness

Attitude

Behavioral Intention

Factor Loading
0.766
0.824
0.814
0.674
0.781
0.856
0.820
0.837
0.892
0.621
0.847
0.782
0.657
0.862
0.590
0.848
0.897
0.809

CR
0.642

AVE
0.843

Cronbachs alpha
0.840

0.818

0.598

0.811

0.886

0.722

0.891

0.797

0.571

0.812

0.750

0.507

0.840

0.726

0.888

0.904

In addition, Tables 2 and 3 illustrate the AVE value for each construct is higher than 0.50 which is considered to be in
the acceptable range [49]. Furthermore, the exploratory factor analysis was conducted to offer evidence of
unidimensionality of the items of each construct. According to tables 4 and 5, the loading value of each factor is greater
than or equal to 0.5 and also reach the significance level of p < 0.001.
Discriminant validity is presented when each item relates weakly with all constructs except for the one it is
theoretically correlated with. Discriminant validity is achieved if an item relates more highly with the variable that it is
intended to assess with other variables [50]. Tables 4 and 5 show the implied correlation between the variables in the
models. The results supported the discriminant validity of the measurement models.
Table 4: Correlation between the variables in the model of students
1
2
3
4
5
6

1
1.000
.203
.452
.314
.460
.459

2
1.000
.113
-.093
.275
.224

1.000
.221
.345
.470

1.000
.193
.177

1.000
.526

1.000

Note: 1= Ease of Use; 2= social influence; 3= Behavioral Intention;4=Perceived Enjoment:5= Usefulness; 6= Attitude;

Table 5 : Correlation between the variables in the model of teachers


1
2
3
4
5
6
1
1.000
2
.485
1.000
3
.485
.392
1.000
4
-. 045
.088
-.015
1.000
5
.576
.412
.347
-.074
1.000
6
.567
.535
.382
-.003
.569
1.000
Note: 1= Behavioral Intention ; 2= Ease of Use; 3=Perceived Enjoment ; 4= Social influence; 5= Attitude; 6=Usefulness;

4.3 Structural Model


In order to evaluate the goodness fit of the structure model, six measures have been applied namely, :
-square test,
the goodness-of-fit index (GFI), the adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI), the comparative fit index (CFI), the Tukerlewis Index(TLI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). The structural model met all previous
goodness of fit measures see Tables 6 and 7.

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Page 6

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)


Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm
Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Table 6: Results of the students model goodness-of-fit


Model fit index
/df
Goodness-of-fit index (GFI)
Tuker-lewis Index(TLI)
Comparative fit index(CFI)
Adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI)
Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)

Criteria
<3.0
>=0.9
>=0.9
>=0.9
>0.8
<0.08

Values
1.784
.90
.92
.93
.87
.050

References
[51]
[52]
[53]
[52]
[54]
[54]

Table 7 : Results of the teacherss model goodness-of-fit


Model fit index
/df
Goodness-of-fit index (GFI)
Tuker-lewis Index(TLI)
Comparative fit index(CFI)
Adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI)
Root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)

Criteria
<3.0
>=0.9
>=0.9
>=0.9
>0.8
<0.08

Values
1.31
.90
.97
.97
.85
.041

References
[51]
[52]
[53]
[52]
[54]
[54]

5. Results and Hypothesis Testing


The results from the structural equation modelling present that all of the hypothesized relationships were supported,
except one relationships in model 1 and two relationships in model 2. Figure 2 and Figure 3 shows the standardized
path coefficients between model constructs, their statistical significance for the structural model, and coefficient of
determinant ( R2 ) for each independent constructs.

Figure 2 Structural model results of students

Figure 3 Structural model results of teachers


In model 1, Perceived Usefulness to e-learning was predicted by Perceived enjoyment ( = 0 .107, p < 0.001), and
social influence ( = 0.271, p < 0.001). These variables explained 0.44 percent of the Perceived Usefulness ( R2 =
0.44). Therefore, hypotheses H1a was rejected and hypotheses H3a was supported. Perceived Ease of Use was

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Page 7

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)


A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm


Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

predicted by Perceived Enjoyment ( = 0 .240, p < 0.001), and Social Iinfluence ( = 0.181, p < 0.01). These variables
explained 0.36 percent of the Perceived Usefulness ( R2 = 0.36). As result, hypotheses H2a, H4a were supported.
Attitude Towards Behaviour was predicted by Perceived Ease of Use ( = .365, p < 0.001) and Perceived Usefulness (
= .463, p < 0.001). Those variables together explained 0.38 percent of the Attitude towards Behaviour (R2 = 0.48).
Therefore, hypotheses H5a, and H6a were supported. Attitude Towards Behaviour significantly ( = .523, p < 0.001)
affects Behavioural Intention to Use while explaining 27% of the amount variance in behavioural intention to use.
Consequently, hypothesis H7a was supported.
In model 2, Perceived Usefulness to e-learning was predicted by Perceived Enjoyment ( = 0 .221, p < 0.01), and Social
Influence ( = -0.20, p < 0.001). These variables explained 0.57 percent of the Perceived Usefulness ( R2 = 0.57).
Therefore, hypotheses H1b was supported and hypotheses H3b was rejected. Perceived Ease of Use was predicted by
Perceived Enjoyment ( = 0 .169, p < 0.001), and Social Iinfluence ( = 0.075, p < 0.001). These variables explained
0.40 percent of the Perceived Usefulness ( R2 = 0.40). As result, hypotheses H2b was supported and hypotheses H4b
was rejected.
Attitude Towards Behaviour was predicted by Perceived Ease of Use ( = .284, p < 0.001) and Perceived Usefulness (
= .661, p < 0.001). Those variables together explained 0.69 percent of the Attitude Towards Behaviour (R2 = 0.69).
Therefore, hypotheses H5b, and H6b were supported. Attitude Towards Behaviour significantly ( = .799, p < 0.001)
affects Behavioural Intention to Use while explaining 0.64 of the amount variance in Behavioural Intention to Use.
Consequently, hypothesis H7b was supported.

6. CONCLUSION
The aim of the this research is to investigate the factors that influence students' and teachers' Behavioural Intention to
use e-learning as a tool for teaching and learning in Libyan higher education. Based on literature review, PE, SI, PU,
PEOU, and ATU towards e-learning are the factors that were identified as an important determinants of students and
teachers Behavioural Intention (BI) to use e-learning. A conceptual model that extends the Technology Acceptance
Model (TAM) to include Perceived Enjoyment and Social Influence as main determinants was proposed. Based on the
literature review, the research model was developed and employed to explore relationships between these determinants
and their impact on students and teachers Behavioural Intentions to use e-learning. Consistent with [29], [55] the
research model excluded the individual actual usage from TAM in addition to replacing the external variables by
Perceived Enjoyment and Social Influence.
The results of this study presented that Social Influence plays an important role in students Behavioural Intention to
use e-learning but not an important role in teachers Behavioural Intention to use e-learning in this case. This implies
that friends, colleagues, students family, supervisor or supervisor at work have effect and impact towards the Intent to
Use of e-learning by students but have no effect on the teachers. As hypothesized in the students model, Social
Influence significantly affects on students Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use of e-learning. This result is
consistent with the results of a past study by [56]-[58] that Social Influence influences both Perceived Usefulness and
Perceived Ease of Use of e-learning system.
As hypothesized in teachers model 2, Social Influence did not affect either Perceived Ease of Use or Perceived
Usefulness and the result is consistent with a number of previous research studies [59]. Davis [60] found that Social
Influence had no significant effect on intentions over and above Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use. One
possible explanation for this finding is that the majority of teachers were male. As presented in demographic profile,
62.1 percent of the teachers were male. Venkatesh and Morris [61] pointed out that the social influence affect men less
than women.
The results from this paper show that Perceived Enjoyment significantly affects on students Perceived Ease of Use of elearning in Libyan higher education. This finding is supported and is in accordance with [62]. They also found that
Perceived Enjoyment had a significant impact on the ease of use of e-learning. However, this study found that Perceived
Enjoyment has no effect on students Perceived Usefulness of e-learning in Libya. One possible explanation is that the
majority of students were female. As shown in demographic profile, 64.2 percent of students were female. Venkatesh
and Morris [61] stated that men are more driven by instrumental factors such as perceived usefulness than women.
Regarding the teachers, the results of the paper present that Perceived Enjoyment significantly affects teachers
Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use of e-learning. This result is consistent with the results of a past study
by the [62], [ 63] that Perceived Enjoyment influences both Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use of elearning system.
On the other hand, the results shown that Perceived Enjoyment significantly has a strong influence on the Perceived
Ease of Use for both students and teachers, which indirectly provide a support for investigating student and teacher
intention to accept and use e-learning. If students and teachers believe that e-learning are enjoyable and interesting for
teaching and learning, it will become very easy for them to accept and adopt it in their learning process [41].

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Page 8

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)


A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm


Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

In summary, this study inducated that Social Influence significantly affects on students Perceived Usefulness and
Perceived Ease of Use of e-learning but no affect on teachers Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use of elearning in Libyan higher education. This study also inducated that Perceived Enjoyment significantly affects on
students Perceived Ease of Use of e-learning but no affect on students Perceived Usefulness of e-learning in Libyan
higher education. Moreover, this study shows that Perceived Enjoyment significantly affects on teachers Perceived
Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use of e-learning in Libya higher education.

References
[1]. K. M. Fletcher, "Self-efficacy as an evaluation measure for programs in support of online learning literacies for
undergraduates," The Internet and higher education, vol. 8, pp. 307-322, 2005.
[2]. E. W. Ngai, J. Poon, and Y. Chan, "Empirical examination of the adoption of WebCT using TAM," Computers &
education, vol. 48, pp. 250-267, 2007.
[3]. N. Li and G. Kirkup, "Gender and cultural differences in Internet use: A study of China and the UK," Computers
& Education, vol. 48, pp. 301-317, 2007.
[4]. A. Othman, C. Pislaru, T. Kenan, and A. Impes, "Analysing the Effectiveness of IT Strategy in Libyan Higher
Education Institutes," International Journal of Digital Information and Wireless Communications (IJDIWC), vol.
3, pp. 114-129, 2013.
[5]. A. Rhema and I. Miliszewska, "Towards e-learning in higher education in Libya," Issues in Informing Science and
Information Technology, vol. 7, pp. 423-7, 2010.
[6]. K. S. Kim and J. Moore, "Webbased learning: Factors affecting students satisfaction and learning experience,"
First Monday, vol. 10, 2005.
[7]. G. H. Jones and B. H. Jones, "A Comparison of Teacher and Student Attitudes Concerning Use and Effectiveness
of Web-based Course Management Software," Educational technology & society, vol. 8, pp. 125-135, 2005.
[8]. V. Venkatesh and H. Bala, "Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions," Decision
sciences, vol. 39, pp. 273-315, 2008.
[9]. S. Zhang, J. Zhao, and W. Tan, "Extending TAM for online learning systems: an intrinsic motivation perspective,"
Tsinghua Science & Technology, vol. 13, pp. 312-317, 2008.
[10]. A. Elkaseh, K. W. Wong, and C. C. Fung, "A Review of the Critical Success Factors of Implementing E-learning
in Higher Education," The International Journal of Technologies in Learning, vol. Volume 22, pp. pp. 1-13, March
31,2015 2015.
[11]. D. Wu, S. R. Hiltz, and M. Bieber, "Acceptance of educational technology: field studies of asynchronous
participatory examinations," Communications of the Association for Information Systems, vol. 26, p. 21, 2010.
[12]. K. Amoako-Gyampah, "Perceived usefulness, user involvement and behavioral intention: an empirical study of
ERP implementation," Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 23, pp. 1232-1248, 2007.
[13]. B. J. Landry, R. Griffeth, and S. Hartman, "Measuring student perceptions of blackboard using the technology
acceptance model," Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, vol. 4, pp. 87-99, 2006.
[14]. S. C. Chang and F. C. Tung, "An empirical investigation of students' behavioural intentions to use the online
learning course websites," British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 39, pp. 71-83, 2008.
[15]. W. J. Doll and G. Torkzadeh, "Developing a multidimensional measure of system-use in an organizational
context," Information & Management, vol. 33, pp. 171-185, 1998.
[16]. Y.-H. Lee, Y.-C. Hsieh, and C.-N. Hsu, "Adding Innovation Diffusion Theory to the Technology Acceptance
Model: Supporting Employees' Intentions to use E-Learning Systems," Journal of Educational Technology &
Society, vol. 14, 2011.
[17]. M. Srite, "Culture as an explanation of technology acceptance differences: an empirical investigation of Chinese
and US users," Australasian Journal of Information Systems, vol. 14, 2006.
[18]. T. Teo, C. B. Lee, and C. S. Chai, "Understanding preservice teachers' computer attitudes: applying and
extending the technology acceptance model," Journal of computer assisted learning, vol. 24, pp. 128-143, 2008.
[19]. V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis, "A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal
field studies," Management science, vol. 46, pp. 186-204, 2000.
[20]. H. N. Kim, "The phenomenon of blogs and theoretical model of blog use in educational contexts," Computers &
Education, vol. 51, pp. 1342-1352, 2008.
[21]. T. Teo, "Factors influencing teachers intention to use technology: Model development and test," Computers &
Education, vol. 57, pp. 2432-2440, 2011.
[22]. M. H. Seif, M. R. Sarmadi, I. Ebrahimzadeh, and H. Zare, "A Model for Predicting Intention to Use E-learning
based on Epistemological Beliefs," Life Science Journal, vol. 9, pp. 926-929, 2012.
[23]. M. Fishbein and I. Ajzen, Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research, 1975.
[24]. J. E. Woodrow, "Locus of control and student teacher computer attitudes," Computers & Education, vol. 14, pp.
421-432, 1990.

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Page 9

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)


A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm


Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

[25]. A. Rhema, I. Miliszewska, and E. M. Sztendur, "Attitudes towards e-Learning and Satisfaction with Technology
among Engineering Students and Instructors in Libya," Proceedings of Informing Science & IT Education
Conference, 2013.
[26]. Y. Zhao and F. L. Bryant, "Can teacher technology integration training alone lead to high levels of technology
integration? A qualitative look at teachers technology integration after state mandated technology training,"
Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, vol. 5, pp. 53-62, 2006.
[27]. L. L. Martins and F. W. Kellermanns, "A model of business school students' acceptance of a web-based course
management system," Academy of Management Learning & Education, vol. 3, pp. 7-26, 2004.
[28]. I.-C. Tsai, I.-P. Tung, and J. Laffey, "Exploring the impact of students motivation and self-regulation on the
social nature of online learning experiences," International Journal of Learning Technology, vol. 8, pp. 86-108,
2013.
[29]. S. Y. Park, "An Analysis of the Technology Acceptance Model in Understanding University Students' Behavioral
Intention to Use e-Learning," Educational Technology & Society, vol. 12, pp. 150-162, 2009.
[30]. R. Bataineh and A. Baniabdelrahman, "Jordanian EFL students perceptions of their computer literacy,"
International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, vol. 2, 2006.
[31]. M. K. Lee, C. M. Cheung, and Z. Chen, "Acceptance of Internet-based learning medium: the role of extrinsic and
intrinsic motivation," Information & management, vol. 42, pp. 1095-1104, 2005.
[32]. H.-M. Huang and S.-S. Liaw, "Exploring users' attitudes and intentions toward the web as a survey tool,"
Computers in human behavior, vol. 21, pp. 729-743, 2005.
[33]. T. S. Teo and V. K. Lim, "Usage patterns and perceptions of the internet: the gender gap," Equal Opportunities
International, vol. 16, pp. 1-8, 1997.
[34]. F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw, "Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the
workplace1," Journal of applied social psychology, vol. 22, pp. 1111-1132, 1992.
[35]. T. Pikkarainen, K. Pikkarainen, H. Karjaluoto, and S. Pahnila, "Consumer acceptance of online banking: an
extension of the technology acceptance model," Internet research, vol. 14, pp. 224-235, 2004.
[36]. [36] M. Ally and M. Gardiner, "Application and device characteristics as drivers for smart mobile device adoption
and productivity," International Journal of Organisational Behaviour, vol. 17, pp. 35-47, 2012.
[37]. V. Venkatesh, "Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into
the technology acceptance model," Information systems research, vol. 11, pp. 342-365, 2000.
[38]. M. Igbaria, J. Iivari, and H. Maragahh, "Why do individuals use computer technology? A Finnish case study,"
Information & Management, vol. 29, pp. 227-238, 1995.
[39]. J. Wexler, "Why computer users accept new systems," MIT Sloan Management Review, vol. 42, p. 17, 2001.
[40]. M. Y. Yi and Y. Hwang, "Predicting the use of web-based information systems: self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning
goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model," International journal of human-computer studies, vol. 59,
pp. 431-449, 2003.
[41]. J.-H. Huang, Y.-R. Lin, and S.-T. Chuang, "Elucidating user behavior of mobile learning: A perspective of the
extended technology acceptance model," Electronic Library, The, vol. 25, pp. 585-598, 2007.
[42]. A. Tarhini, K. Hone, and X. Liu, "Factors Affecting Students Acceptance of e-Learning Environments in
Developing Countries: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach," context, vol. 10, p. 17, 2013.
[43]. V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, "User acceptance of information technology: Toward a
unified view," MIS quarterly, pp. 425-478, 2003.
[44]. S. Taylor and P. Todd, "Decomposition and crossover effects in the theory of planned behavior: A study of
consumer adoption intentions," International journal of research in marketing, vol. 12, pp. 137-155, 1995.
[45]. E. M. Van Raaij and J. J. Schepers, "The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China,"
Computers & Education, vol. 50, pp. 838-852, 2008.
[46]. W. Lewis, R. Agarwal, and V. Sambamurthy, "Sources of influence on beliefs about information technology use:
an empirical study of knowledge workers," MIS quarterly, pp. 657-678, 2003.
[47]. M. T. Dishaw and D. M. Strong, "Extending the technology acceptance model with tasktechnology fit
constructs," Information & Management, vol. 36, pp. 9-21, 1999.
[48]. Y.-C. Lee, "An empirical investigation into factors influencing the adoption of an e-learning system," Online
Information Review, vol. 30, pp. 517-541, 2006.
[49]. J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, R. E. Anderson, and R. L. Tatham, Multivariate data analysis vol. 6: Pearson
Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2006.
[50]. G. Garson. (2009). Validity. [On line]. Available: http://faculty.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/PA765/validity.htm
[51]. W. W. Chin and P. A. Todd, "On the use, usefulness, and ease of use of structural equation modeling in MIS
research: a note of caution," MIS quarterly, pp. 237-246, 1995.

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Page 10

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)


A Publisher for Research Motivation ........

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm


Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-5976

[52]. R. L. Tatham and W. C. Black, "Multivariate data analysis," Prcentice Hall, New Jersey. Titman, S. and R.
Wessels, vol. 1, pp. 1-19, 1998.
[53]. R. Schumacker and R. Lomax, "A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling, 1996," Mahwah, New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, vol. 288, p. 144, 2010.
[54]. J. F. Hair, R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham, and W. C. Black, "Multivariate data analysis with readings," New
Jersey: Englewood, 1995.
[55]. M. Masrom, "Technology acceptance model and e-learning," 2007.
[56]. G. Choi and H. Chung, "Elaborating the technology acceptance model with social pressure and social benefits for
social networking sites (SNSs)," Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
vol. 49, pp. 1-3, 2012.
[57]. B. Watjatrakul, "Intention to use a free voluntary service: The effects of social influence, knowledge and
perceptions," Journal of Systems and Information Technology, vol. 15, pp. 202-220, 2013.
[58]. T. Farahat, "Applying the technology acceptance model to online learning in the Egyptian universities," ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 64, pp. 95-104, 2012.
[59]. K. Mathieson, "Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned
behavior," Information systems research, vol. 2, pp. 173-191, 1991.
[60]. F. D. Davis, "Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology," MIS
quarterly, pp. 319-340, 1989.
[61]. V. Venkatesh and M. G. Morris, "Why don't men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and
their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior," MIS quarterly, pp. 115-139, 2000.
[62]. S. H.-P. Shyu and J.-H. Huang, "Elucidating usage of e-government learning: A perspective of the extended
technology acceptance model," Government Information Quarterly, vol. 28, pp. 491-502, 2011.
[63]. A. Balog and C. Pribeanu, "The Role of Perceived Enjoyment in the Students Acceptance of an Augmented
Reality Teaching Platform: a Structural Equation Modelling Approach," Studies in Informatics and Control, vol.
19, pp. 319-330, 2010.

AUTHOR
Ali Mohamed Elkaseh is currently PHD student in Sochool of Engineering and Information technology at
Murdoch University, south street campus, Murdoch, Western Australia. He hold his a master's degree in
microprocessor systems from Belarusian State University of Information and Radioelectronics in 2005, Belarus. He
has a bachelor's degree in computer science from University of Tripoli in Libya Prior to his PHD candidature, he
was full time lecturer, and a head of department of computer science at Elmergab University in Libya. His research
interests include critical success factors of implementing e-learning in higher educational institutions, social
networking media effect on behaviour towards e-learning.
.
Kok Wai (Kevin) Wong is currently working as an Associate Professor with the School of Engineering and
Information Technology at Murdoch University in Western Australia. He is the current Chapter Chair for IEEE
Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Society (WA Chapter). He is the Vice President and Governing Board Member of
the Asia Pacific Neural Network Assembly (APNNA). He is also serving as a member for the Emergent
Technologies Technical Committee (ETTC) and Game Technical Committee (GTC) of the IEEE Computational
Intelligence Society (CIS).
Kevin Wong involved in the editorial boards for a number of international journals and in many international conference organising
committees. He is the General Conference Co-Chair for the 7th International Conference on E-Learning and Games, the 24th
Australasian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, the Second International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in
Entertainment and Arts, and the Joint International Conference on CyberGames and Interactive Entertainment. He is the Program
Co-Chair for The 21st International Conference on Neural Information Processing (ICONIP 2014).
Associate Professor Chun Che (Lance) Fung is the Associate Dean of Research in the School of Engineering and
Information Technology. He was trained as a Marine Radio and Electronic Officer from the Hong Kong Polytechnic
and Brunel Technical College, Bristol UK. He graduated with a Bachelor of Science Degree with First Class
Honors in Maritime Studies and a Master of Engineering Degree in System Test Technology, from the University of
Wales, Cardiff, United Kingdom, and a PhD degree from the University of Western Australia. He taught at the
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Singapore Polytechnic and at the School of Electrical
and Computer Engineering, Curtin University of Technology. His research interest is in the development and applications of
Computational Intelligent techniques for practical problems and technology for education. In addition, Lance is the current Chair of
the IEEE Australia Council and has also been nominated as a candidate for the IEEE Asia-Pacific Regional Director-Elect 2015-16.

Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2015

Page 11