Psychometric Analysis of an Instrument Evaluating Students’ Acceptance of Online Platform to Support Online English Learning
Keywords:Psychometric, Rasch-analysis, Technology Acceptance Model
Acceptance of technology takes as a crucial role in context of the technology adoption. Before encouraging the maximal use of technology, it is important that users have to first acknowledge its use and that they have to also accept it. The current study was proposed in aims to examine the validity and the reliability of the Indonesian version of instrument investigating TAM constructs such as perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and behavioural intention. The questionnaire was adopted to elaborate the undergraduate students’ technology acceptance of WhatsApp, Google Classroom, and Microsoft Teams as online platform to support online English learning based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Data were collected from 370 undergraduate students from different universities in Indonesia and the study applied Rasch analysis technique to address the Rasch assumptions such as items dimensionality, person and item reliability, person and item mapping, rating scale, and differential items functioning measure. The findings of the study suggested that the adopted and translated to Indonesian questionnaire was found to be sufficient in context of psychometric characteristics and was considered eligible to measure the technology acceptance of online platforms used for English online learning.
Al-Maroof, R. S., & Salloum, S. A. (2021). An Integrated Model of Continuous Intention to Use of Google Classroom. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47411-9_18.
Alfadda, H. A., & Mahdi, H. S. (2021). Measuring Students’ Use of Zoom Application in Language Course Based on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 50(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-020-09752-1.
Azman, M., S, K., Puad F, Kamis A, Jerusalem M, & Sari M. (2020). The Usage of E-Learning Platform between MyGuru Malaysia and BeSmart Indonesia towards Perceived Usefulness and Behavioral Intention to Use. Psychology And Education, 57(8), 214–220. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpe.v11i1.55533.
Bhattacherjee, A. (2001). An empirical analysis of the antecedents of electronic commerce service continuance. Decision Support Systems, 32(2), 201–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(01)00111-7.
Buchal, R., & Songsore, E. (2018). Collaborative Knowledge Building using Microsoft SharePoint. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA). https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.v0i0.13043.
Cakir, R., & Solak, E. (2014). The Factors Influencing E-Learning Of Turkish Efl Learners Through TAM. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(3), 79–87. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1034230.
Chan, M., & Subramaniam, R. (2020). Validation of a Science Concept Inventory by Rasch Analysis. In Rasch Measurement (pp. 159–178). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1800-3_9.
Chen Hsieh, J. S., Wu, W.-C. V., & Marek, M. W. (2017). Using the flipped classroom to enhance EFL learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(1–2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2015.1111910.
Cheung, R., & Vogel, D. (2013). Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Computers & Education, 63, 160–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.003.
Chung, H.-H., Chen, S.-C., & Kuo, M.-H. (2015). A Study of EFL College Students’ Acceptance of Mobile Learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.479.
Colledani, D., Anselmi, P., & Robusto, E. (2020). Rasch models in the analysis of repgrid data. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720537.2020.1852461.
Coskun, A., & Marlowe, Z. (2015). Technology in ELT: English Teachers Investigate Animoto and Fotobabble. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v4n3p119.
Craig Gamble. (2017). Exploring EFL University Students’ Acceptance of Elearning Using TAM. Kwansei Gakuin University Humanities Review, 22, 23–37. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/151651395.pdf.
Francom, G. M., Schwan, A., & Nuatomue, J. N. (2021). Comparing Google Classroom and D2L Brightspace Using the Technology Acceptance Model. TechTrends, 65(1), 111–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00533-0.
Hackbarth, G., Grover, V., & Yi, M. Y. (2003). Computer playfulness and anxiety: positive and negative mediators of the system experience effect on perceived ease of use. Information & Management, 40(3), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(02)00006-X.
Hoi, V. N., & Mu, G. M. (2021). Perceived teacher support and students’ acceptance of mobile‐assisted language learning: Evidence from Vietnamese higher education context. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(2), 879–898. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13044.
Hu, P. J.-H., Clark, T. H. K., & Ma, W. W. (2003). Examining technology acceptance by school teachers: a longitudinal study. Information & Management, 41(2), 227–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(03)00050-8.
Huang, F., Huang, L., & Oon, P.-T. (2020). Constructs Evaluation of Student Attitudes Toward Science—A Rasch Analysis. In Rasch Measurement (pp. 139–157). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1800-3_8.
Iftakhar, S. (2016). Google Classroom: What Works And How? Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 3(1), 12–18. https://jesoc.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/KC3_35.pdf.
Kant, R. (2018). Whatsapp Usage: Attitude And Perceptions Of College Students. Conflux: Journal Of Education, 5(9). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ravi-Kant-42/publication/323935784.
Lee, M.-C. (2010). Explaining and predicting users’ continuance intention toward e-learning: An extension of the expectation–confirmation model. Computers & Education, 54(2), 506–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.002.
Linh, H. G., & Ngo, T. T. C. (2021). Challenges in learning listening comprehension via Microsoft Teams among English majors at Van Lang University. International Journal of TESOL & Education Home, 1(3), 142–175. http://i-jte.org/index.php/journal/article/view/36.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x.
Mpungose, C. B. (2020). Is Moodle or WhatsApp the preferred e-learning platform at a South African university? First-year students’ experiences. Education and Information Technologies, 25(2), 927–941. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10005-5.
Mulyono, H., Saskia, R., Arrummaiza, V. S., & Suryoputro, G. (2020). Psychometric assessment of an instrument evaluating the effects of affective variables on students’ WTC in face-to-face and digital environment. Cogent Psychology, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2020.1823617.
Mulyono, H., Suryoputro, G., & Jamil, S. R. (2021). The application of WhatsApp to support online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Heliyon, 7(8). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07853.
Muntazhimah, Putri, S., & Khusna, H. (2020). Rasch Model untuk Memvalidasi Instrumen Resiliensi Matematis Mahasiswa Calon Guru Matematika. JKPM (Jurnal Kajian Pendidikan Matematika), 6(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.30998/jkpm.v6i1.8144.
Nazari, N., Nafissi, Z., Estaji, M., & Marandi, S. S. (2019). Evaluating novice and experienced EFL teachers’ perceived TPACK for their professional development. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1632010. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1632010.
Ningsih, S. K., Mulyono, H., Ar Rahmah, R., & Fitriani, N. A. (2021). A Rasch-based validation of EFL teachers’ received online social support scale. Cogent Education, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1957529.
Pal, D., & Vanijja, V. (2020). Perceived usability evaluation of Microsoft Teams as an online learning platform during COVID-19 using system usability scale and technology acceptance model in India. Children and Youth Services Review, 119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105535.
Rauniar, R., Rawski, G., Yang, J., & Johnson, B. (2014). Technology acceptance model (TAM) and social media usage: an empirical study on Facebook. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 27(1), 6–30. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-04-2012-0011.
Teo, T., Doleck, T., Bazelais, P., & Lemay, D. J. (2019). Exploring the drivers of technology acceptance: a study of Nepali school students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(2), 495–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09654-7.
Tseng, J.-J. (2018). Exploring TPACK-SLA interface: insights from the computer-enhanced classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(4), 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1412324.
Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis. (2003). User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540.
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342–365. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.11.4.342.11872.
Yu, C. H. (2020). Objective measurement: How Rasch modeling can simplify and enhance your assessment. In Rasch Measurement (pp. 47–73). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1800-3_4.
Copyright (c) 2022 JPI (Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with the Jurnal Pendidikan Indnesia agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. (See The Effect of Open Access)