Article Sidebar

Submitted
Feb 6, 2021
Accepted
Aug 13, 2022
Published
Aug 30, 2022
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 526 Download : 22620

Main Article Content

Abstract

The present study examines the moderating role of internet self-efficacy on the relationship between the perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and organisational support and behavioural intention of hospitality students in adopting the MOOC courses. This empirical study is based on the responses from hospitality students studying in one of the premier hospitality institutes in Karnataka, India. Structural equation modeling and process macro are used to test the proposed hypotheses in the study. The finding suggests that internet self-efficacy had a moderating effect only between organisational support and behavioural intention. In other words, study findings indicate that improved self-efficacy and organisational support lead to hospitality students’ greater behavioural intention to adopt MOOCs for their academic accomplishments. The study outcomes are helpful for the universities’ higher authorities formulate organizational support in technical and internet self-efficacy to achieve more success in adopting the MOOC.

Keywords

MOOC Hospitality Students Internet Self-Efficacy Organisational Support Behavioral Intention

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The author declares that the submitted to Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society (Je-LKS) is original and that is has neither been published previously nor is currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
The author agrees that SIe-L (Italian Society of e-Learning) has the right to publish the material sent for inclusion in the journal Je-LKS.
The author agree that articles may be published in digital format (on the Internet or on any digital support and media) and in printed format, including future re-editions, in any language and in any license including proprietary licenses, creative commons license or open access license. SIe-L may also use parts of the work to advertise and promote the publication.
The author declares s/he has all the necessary rights to authorize the editor and SIe-L to publish the work.
The author assures that the publication of the work in no way infringes the rights of third parties, nor violates any penal norms and absolves SIe-L from all damages and costs which may result from publication.

The author declares further s/he has received written permission without limits of time, territory, or language from the rights holders for the free use of all images and parts of works still covered by copyright, without any cost or expenses to SIe-L.

For all the information please check the Ethical Code of Je-LKS, available at http://www.je-lks.org/index.php/ethical-code

How to Cite
Narayan, Payini, V., & Mallya, J. (2022). Factors affecting adoption of MOOC by hospitality students: a moderating role of Internet self-efficacy . Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 18(2), 34-40. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135455

References

  1. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. 1980. Prentice-Hall.
  2. Al-Adwan, A. S. (2020). Investigating the drivers and barriers to MOOCs adoption: The perspective of TAM. Education and Information Technologies, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10250-z
  3. Al-Emran, M., & Teo, T. (2020). Do knowledge acquisition and knowledge sharing affect e-learning adoption? An empirical study. Education and Information Technologies, 25(3), 1983–1998. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10062-w
  4. Alraimi, K. M., Zo, H., & Ciganek, A. P. (2015). Understanding the MOOCs continuance: The role of openness and reputation. Computers and Education, 80, 28–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.006
  5. Bandura, A., Freeman, W. H., & Lightsey, R. (1999). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 13(2), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.1891/0889-8391.13.2.158
  6. Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
  7. Bhattacherjee, A., & Hikmet, N. (2008). Reconceptualizing organizational support and its effect on information technology usage: Evidence from the health care sector. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 48(4), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.2008.11646036
  8. Bozkurt, A., & Keskin, N. O. (2016). Research Trends in Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) Theses and Dissertations: Surfing the Tsunami Wave. Open Praxis, 8(3), 203–221. https://doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.8.3.287
  9. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit. Sociological Methods & Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124192021002005
  10. Chen, B., Sivo, S., Seilhamer, R., Sugar, A., & Mao, J. (2013). User acceptance of mobile technology: A campus-wide implementation of blackboard’s mobileTM learn application. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(3), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.49.3.c
  11. Chen, J. A., Wu, D., Cheng, J. N., Fu, B., Zhang, L., & Lu, A. M. (2017). Application of MOOC teaching in sports course teaching practice. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(12), 8089–8097. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80770
  12. El Said, G. R. (2017). Understanding How Learners Use Massive Open Online Courses and Why They Drop Out. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(5), 724–752.
  13. Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. In Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective (Vol. 7th).
  14. Hayes, A. F. (2018). Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Communication Monographs, 85(1), 4–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100
  15. Henderikx, M., Kreijns, K., & Kalz, M. (2017). To change or not to change? That’s the question… on MOOC-success, barriers and their implications. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 10254 LNCS, pp. 210–216). Springer Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59044-8_25
  16. Higgins, H., & Gulliford, A. (2014). Understanding teaching assistant self-efficacy in role and in training: Its susceptibility to influence. Educational Psychology in Practice, 30(2), 120–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2014.896250
  17. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit Indices in Covariance Structure Modeling: Sensitivity to Underparameterized Model Misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
  18. Igbaria, M. (1990). End-user computing effectiveness: A structural equation model. Omega, 18(6), 637–652. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(90)90055-E
  19. Igbaria, Magid, Parasuraman, S., & Baroudi, J. J. (1996). A Motivational Model of Microcomputer Usage. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(1), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.1996.11518115
  20. Jordan, K. (2014). Initial Trends in Enrolment and Completion of Massive Open Online Courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(1), 133–160. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i1.1651
  21. Kao, C. P., & Chien, H. M. (2017). Web-searching to learn: The role of internet self-efficacy in pre-school educators’ conceptions and approaches. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2039–2056. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.01212a
  22. Lin, J., Cantoni, L., & Murphy, J. (2018). MOOCs in tourism and hospitality: a review. Journal of Teaching in Travel and Tourism, 18(3), 217–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313220.2018.1428505
  23. Luik, P., Feklistova, L., Lepp, M., Tõnisson, E., Suviste, R., Gaiduk, M., … Palts, T. (2019). Participants and completers in programming MOOCs. Education and Information Technologies, 24(6), 3689–3706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09954-8
  24. Ma, L., & Lee, C. S. (2020). Drivers and barriers to MOOC adoption: perspectives from adopters and non-adopters. Online Information Review, 44(3), 671–684. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-06-2019-0203
  25. Mallya, J., Lakshminarayanan, S., & Payini, V. (2019). Self-efficacy as an antecedent to students’ behavioral intention to use the Internet for academic purposes: A structural equation modeling approach. Library Philosophy and Practice, 2019.
  26. Melicherikova, Z., & Piovarci, A. (2016). Experience with massive open online courses in Slovakia. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1048
  27. Mohan, M. M., Upadhyaya, P., & Pillai, K. R. (2020). Intention and barriers to use MOOCs: An investigation among the post graduate students in India. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10215-2
  28. Normandi Atiaja Atiaja, L., & Segundo Guerrero Proenza, R. (2016). MOOCs: Origin, characterization, principal problems and challenges in higher education. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1093
  29. O’Mahony, B., & Salmon, G. (2014). The role of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in the democratization of tourism and hospitality education. In The Routledge Handbook of Tourism and Hospitality Education (130–142). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203763308-22
  30. Sharif, A., & Raza, S. A. (2017). The influence of hedonic motivation, self-efficacy, trust and habit on adoption of internet banking: A case of developing country. International Journal of Electronic Customer Relationship Management, 11(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJECRM.2017.086750
  31. Tao, D., Fu, P., Wang, Y., Zhang, T., & Qu, X. (2019). Key characteristics in designing massive open online courses (MOOCs) for user acceptance: an application of the extended technology acceptance model. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1695214
  32. Tawafak, R. M., Romli, A. B. T., Arshah, R. bin A., & Malik, S. I. (2020). Framework design of university communication model (UCOM) to enhance continuous intentions in teaching and e-learning process. Education and Information Technologies, 25(2), 817–843. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09984-2
  33. Tracey, J. B., Murphy, J., & Horton-Tognazzini, L. (2016). A Framework for Evaluating MOOCs in Applied Hospitality and Tourism Settings. In Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2016 (667–679). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28231-2_48
  34. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  35. Xing, W., Research, D. D.-J. of E. C. (2018). Dropout prediction in MOOCs: Using deep learning for personalized intervention. Journals.Sagepub.Com, 57(3), 547–570. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118757015

DB Error: Unknown column 'Array' in 'where clause'