ict acceptance and use by ukm graduate students_siti 12,07am_edited 1.30 pm friday_nawal_zaher...

ICT ACCEPTANCE AND USE BY UKM GRADUATE STUDENTS

ZAHER ATWA (P 71592)NAWAL MUSTAFA (P 59223)SITI HASHIDAH BINTI MOHD NASIR (P 66513)

UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA

FAKULTI PENDIDIKAN

GGGB6323 ANALYSIS DATA SEMESTER 2 2013/2014

http://www.google.com.my/imgres?imgurl=http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_PYdPuHnyGq8/TLBfDfDCY3I/AAAAAAAAAYc/jWgQ9inteuk/s1600/logo%20ukm.jpg&imgrefurl=http://mma-medicalstudents.blogspot.com/p/publications.html&usg=__JGVHUTKx6Lln69YQPwt6YloKT7g=&h=339&w=254&sz=26&hl=en&start=3&zoom=1&tbnid=3wtpY4S3ABAzzM:&tbnh=119&tbnw=89&ei=E39NT5mvHI7JrQe_0-miDw&prev=/images?q=logo+ukm&hl=en&sa=X&gbv=2&tbm=isch&itbs=1

INTRODUCTION

OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF ICT UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in Education, 2003

audiocassette tapes, radio, videotapes, CD-ROM, the Internet, wireline technology, wireless technology, web-based training, audioconferencing, audiographics, interactive television, videoconferencing

Toomey, 2001technologies that are used for accessing, gathering, manipulating and presenting or communicating information which could include hardware (e.g. computers and other devices); software applications; and connectivity (e.g. access to the Internet, local networking infrastructure, videoconferencing) as well as the increasing convergence of computer-based, multimedia and communications technologies and the rapid rate of change that characterises both the technologies and their use

ISSUES IN ICT USAGE Gender disparities in ICT usage More males using ICT (Horvat, Oreski &

Markic, 2011, Madell & Muncer, 2004) Nachimas, Moiduser & Shemla, 2000, Sherman et. al., 2000)

OBJECTIVES1. To find out the extent of ICT usage

among graduate students in UKM2. To find out the level of acceptance of

ICT among graduate students in UKM

RESEARCH QUESTIONS1. What is the extent of usage of ICT

among graduate students in UKM in their academic life?

2. What is the acceptance level of ICT among graduate students in UKM?

HYPOTHESIS1. There is no difference between male

and female graduate students of UKM in using ICT

2. There is no difference between Malaysia and non-Malaysian graduate students of UKM in using ICT

VALIDITY & REALIBILITY UTAUT – Unified Theory of Acceptance

and Use of Technology (Venkatesh et al., 2003)

RESEARCH MODEL THEORY

Venkatesh et al. (2003)

DATA COLLECTION Sampling of population – convenience

sampling Due to researchers time constraints Limited access to large number of samples

DATA INPUT The data was checked and screened for

any errors. Negatively worded items were recoded. Regrouped into 5 constructs

DATA ANALYSIS

ICT ACCEPTANCE SCALES Performance expectancy (PE1-4), Effort expectancy (EE5-8), Social influence (SI9-12), Facilitating condition (FC13-20) Behavioral intention (BI21-23).

DATA ANALYSIS: RELIABILITYReliability and consistency of the scale (Chronbach’s alpha

coefficient)

Performan

ce expectanc

y

Effort expectan

cy

Social influen

ce

Facilitating

condition

Behavioral

intention

ICT Accepta

nce

(α) 0.835 0.876 0.804 .790 .946 .821Mean 4.03 3.89 3.76 3.98 3.66 3.94Std. Deviation .81629 .84976 .68403 .58004 .93036 .60641**Mean 4.32 3.87 3.03 3.75 3.31 **Std. Deviation .665 .562 .300 .592 .465

**Oye et al (2011)

DATA ANALYSIS: RELIABILITYReliability and consistency of the scale (Chronbach’s alpha

coefficient)

Performan

ce expectanc

y

Effort expectan

cy

Social influen

ce

Facilitating

condition

Behavioral

intention

ICT Accepta

nce


**Oye et al (2011)

All the scales are reliable and consistent with their samples. (α>0.7) for each one, although the number of the sample is less than 10 per each.

DATA ANALYSIS: ACCEPTANCEReliability and consistency of the scale (Chronbach’s alpha

coefficient)

Performan

ce expectanc

y

Effort expectan

cy

Social influen

ce

Facilitating

condition

Behavioral

intention

ICT Accepta

nce


**Oye et al (2011)

Among the UTAUT constructs, performance expectancy exerted the strongest effect. Therefore Performance expectancy is the most influential factor for the acceptance and use of ICT by the UKM Graduate Students.

DATA ANALYSIS: ACCEPTANCEReliability and consistency of the scale (Chronbach’s alpha

coefficient)

Performan

ce expectanc

y

Effort expectan

cy

Social influen

ce

Facilitating

condition

Behavioral

intention

ICT Accepta

nce

(α) 0.835 0.876 0.804 .790 .946 .821Mean 4.03 3.89 3.76 3.98 3.66 3.94Std. Deviation .82 .85 .68 .58 .93 .60641**Mean 4.32 3.87 3.03 3.75 3.31 **Std. Deviation .67 .56 .30 .59 .47 This result is consistent with Oye et al (2011) study which conducted in Nigeria University. Performance expectancy has the strongest effect and is the most influential factor for the acceptance and use of ICT by the UKM Graduate Students.**Oye et al (2011). Awareness, Adoption and Acceptance of ICT Innovation in Higher Education Institutions, International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA):1(4), pp.1393-1409

CORRELATIONS Performance expectancy

Effort expectancySocial influence

Facilitating conditionBehavioral intention

Performance expectancy

Pearson Correlation 1 .755** .671** .549** .230Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .133N 44 44 44 44 44

Effort expectancy

Pearson Correlation .755** 1 .737** .702** .323*

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .033

Social influence

Pearson Correlation .671** .737** 1 .557** .305*

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .044

Facilitating condition

Pearson Correlation .549** .702** .557** 1 .278Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .068

Behavioral intention

Pearson Correlation .230 .323* .305* .278 1Sig. (2-tailed) .133 .033 .044 .068

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).Correlation is positive for all of them,, small r=.10 to .29,,, medium r=.30 to .49,,, large r=.50 to 1.0

DATA ANALYSIS: GENDER SIGNIFICANT

No significant difference concerning gender

Group Statistics Gend

erN Mean Std.

DeviationStd. Error

MeanICT Acceptance

Male 23 3.9506 .58547 .12208Female 20 3.9341 .65944 .14745

Independent Samples Test Levene's Test

for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean Difference

Std. Error

Difference

95% Confidence Interval of

the Difference

Lower Upper

ICT Acceptance

Equal variances assumed

.000 .993 .087 41 .931 .01650 .18982-.3

6684

.39985

Equal variances not assumed

.086 38.3

94 .932 .01650 .19143-.3

7090

.40390

DATA ANALYSIS: NATIONALITY SIGNIFICANT

No significant difference concerning Nationality

Group Statistics

Nationality N Mean Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

ICT Acceptance (B1-23)

Malaysian 13 4.0699 .40470 .11224Non Malaysian 25 3.8891 .70578 .14116

Independent Samples Test Levene's Test

for Equality of Variances


F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean Differen

ce

Std. Error

Difference

95% Confidence

Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper

ICT Acceptance


3.594.066>0.05

.850 36 .401 .18084 .21263 -.25039 .612

07


1.00

3 35.533 .323 .18084 .18034 -.18508 .54676

DATA ANALYSIS: MARITAL STATUS SIGNIFICANT

There is significant difference concerning Marital Status.

Group Statistics MaritalSt

atusN Mean Std.

DeviationStd. Error

MeanICT Acceptance Single 23 4.1285 .48796 .10175

Married 21 3.7359 .66644 .14543Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances


F Sig. t df Sig. (2-

tailed)

Mean Difference

Std. Error

Difference

95% Confidence Interval of the

DifferenceLower Upper

ICT Acceptance


1.768

.191 2.23 42 .03

0 .3925 .17501

.03935

.74571


2.22 36.45 .033 .3925 .1774

9.0327

2.7523

4

Thanks YouTerima Kasih

شكرا

ict acceptance and use by ukm graduate students_siti 12,07am_edited 1.30 pm friday_nawal_zaher...

Documents