Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Performance expectancy of E-learning on higher institutions of education under uncertain conditions: Indonesia context

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Performance expectancy is the expected impact of a technology’s functional advantage even in uncertain conditions. This study suggests that the learning collaboration quality, information quality, and course content support impact the actual use of e-learning and satisfaction perceived by the user, resulting in performance expectancy that meets stakeholder expectations. This study outlines the theoretical model for defining student success in e-learning systems through a theory of online collaborative learning. The research examines the empirical data gathered from 109 postgraduate doctoral students’ participated in the postgraduate universities in Indonesia. The research attempts to focus specifically on how the actual use of e-learning and satisfaction perceived by users mediates the influence of learning collaboration quality, information quality, and course content support on performance expectancy to enhance the sustainability and performance of e-learning in Indonesian universities. The study shows that the learning collaboration quality, information quality, and course content support have no impact on performance expectancy, while each of the constructs indirectly impacts the performance expectancy through the actual use of e-learning. Conversely, the learning collaboration quality and course content support have not indirectly influenced toward performance expectancy by satisfaction perceived by the user as mediator except the information quality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Abu-Al-Aish, A., & Love, S. (2013). Factors influencing students’ acceptance of m-learning: An investigation in higher education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(5), 82–107. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v14i5.1631(14) (PDF) Predicting mobile learning acceptance: An integrated model and empirical study based on higher education students' perceptions. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349927523_Predicting_mobile_learning_acceptance_An_integrated_model_and_empirical_study_based_on_higher_education_students'_perceptions [accessed May 13 2021]

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad, N., Quadri, N. N., Qureshi, M. R. N., & Alam, M. M. (2018). Relationship modeling of critical success factors for enhancing sustainability and performance in E-learning. Sustainability, 10(12), 4776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akbar, F. (2013). What affects students’ acceptance and use of technology? https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1ab8/0a44a26e2d09ae0dc3729be409730a782910.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2020. 

  • Al-Araibi, A. A. M., Naz’ri Bin Mahrin, M., & Yusoff, R. C. M. (2019). Technological aspect factors of E- learning readiness in higher education institutions: Delphi technique. Education and Information Technologies, 24(1), 567–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldowah, H., Al-Samarraie, H., & Ghazal, S. (2019). How course, contextual, and technological challenges are associated with instructors’ individual challenges to successfully implement E-learning: A developing country perspective. IEEE Access, 7, 48792–48806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., & Sinclair, J. (2018). A comprehensive model for evaluating e-learning systems success. Distance Learning, 15(3), 57–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almaiah, M. A., & Almulhem, A. (2018). A conceptual framework for determining the success factors of e- learning system implementation using Delphi technique. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, 96, 1–15.

  • Almaiah, M. A., & Alyoussef, I. Y. (2019). Analysis of the effect of course design, course content support, course assessment and instructor characteristics on the actual use of E-learning system. IEEE Access, 7, 171907–171922.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Almaiah, M. A., Al-Khasawneh, A., & Althunibat, A. (2020). Exploring the critical challenges and factors influencing the E-learning system usage during COVID-19 pandemic. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 5261 5280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10219-y

  • Anderson, & Elloumi. (2004). Theory and practice of online learning. Athabasca University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ani, O. E. (2013). Accessibility and utilization of electronic information resources for research and its effect on productivity of academic staff in selected Nigerian universities between 2005 and 2012. A Thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Literature and Philosophy in the subject Information Science at.

  • Aparicio, M., Bacao, F., & Oliveira, T. (2014). Trends in the e-learning ecosystem: A bibliometric study. In proceedings of 20th American conference on information system.  Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2014/Posters/ISEducation/7

  • Aparicio, M., Bacao, F., & Oliveira, T. (2016). Cultural impacts on e-learning systems' success. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 58–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.06.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aparicio, M., Bacao, F., & Oliveira, T. (2017). Grit in the path to e-learning success. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 388–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, J. E., & Pearson, S. W. (1983). Development of a tool for measuring and analyzing computer user satisfaction. Management Science, 29, 530–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bao, W. (2020). COVID -19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking University. Human Behaviour and Emerging Technologies, 2(2), 113–115. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beam, P. (1997). Breaking The Sprinter’s Wrist: Achieving cost-effectiveness online learning. The International Symposium on Distance Education and Open Learning. MONE Indonesia, IDLN, SEAMOLEC, ICDE, UNDP dan UNESCO, Bali.

  • Bentler, PM, Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brahmasrene, T, Lee, J. W. (2012). Determinants of intent to continue using online learning: A tale of two universities. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 7, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.28945/1548

  • Bullen, M. (2001). E-learning and the Internationalizat Education. Malaysian Journal of Education Technologi., 1(1), 37–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, Y. M. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of e-learning acceptance. Information Systems Journal, 21(3), 269–299. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2575.2010.00356.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chua, H. F., Boland, J. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (2005). Cultural variation in eye movements during scene perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(35), 12629–12633.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cidral, W. A., Oliveira, T., Di Felice, M., & Aparicio, M. (2018). E-learning success determinants: Brazilian empirical study. Computers & Education, 122, 273–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, S. J. (2020). Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects, 49, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology". MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339.

  • Dede, R. (2004). Education paradigm (p. 276). Kencana.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3(1), 60–95. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.3.1.60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLone, W. H., McLean, E. R. (2002). Information systems success revisited. In Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (p. 1–11).

  • Dewiyanti, S., Brand-Gruwel, S., Jochems, W., & Broers, N. J. (2007). Students’ experiences with collaborative learning in asynchronous computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 496–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dikti, (2019) Directorate of higher education Indonesia. https://dikti.kemdikbud.go.id/. Accessed 17 July 2020. 

  • Eltahir, M. E. (2019). E-learning in developing countries: Is it a panacea? A case study ofSudan. IEEEAccess, 7, 97784–97792.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engotoit, B., Kituyi, G. M., & Moya, M. B. (2016). Influence of performance expectancy on commercial farmers’ intention to use mobile-based communication technologies for agricultural market information dissemination in Uganda. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 18(4), 346–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R. (2006a). Online collaboration principles. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(1), 25–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R. (2006b). Online collaboration principles. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v10i1.1768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: Aframework for research and practice. Routledge Falmer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison dan Innes. (2005). Facilitating Cognitive Presence in Online Learning: Interaction is Not Enough. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3).

  • Gillborn, D., & Mirza, H. S. (2000). Educational inequality: Mapping race, class and gender—A synthesis of research evidence. Report #HMI 232. Office for Standards in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold, A. H., Malhotra, A., & Segars, A. H. (2001). Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 185–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haghshenas, M. (2019). A model for utilizing social Softwares in learning management system of E-learning. Quarterly Journal of Iranian Distance Education, 1(4), 25–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, M., & Champy, J. (1993). Reengineering the corporation, A Manifesto for Business Revolution. Nicholas Brealey.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harasim, L. M. (2017). Learning theory and online technologies. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ulaval/detail.action?docID=4865772.

  • Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modelling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to Underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Idris, F. A. A., & Osman, Y. B. (2015). Challenges facing the implementation of e-learning at University of Gezira According to view of staff members. 2015 Fifth International Conference on e- Learning (econf) (pp. 336–348). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ECONF.2015.51. 

  • Jambulingam, M. (2013). Behavioral intention to adopt mobile technology among tertiary students. World Applied Sciences Journal, 22(9), 1262–1271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung, I., Choi, S., Lim, C., & Leem, J. (2002). Effects of different types of interaction on learning achievement, satisfaction, and participation in web-based instruction. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39(2), 153e162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchewka, J. T., & Kostiwa, K. (2007). An application of the UTAUT model for understanding student perceptions usingcourse management software. Communications of the IIMA, 7(2), 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Min, Q., Ji, S., Qu, G. (2008). Mobile commerce user acceptance study in china: A revised utaut model. Tsinghua Science and Technology, 13(3), 257–264

  • Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance Education: A systems view of online learning (3rd ed.). Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nwone, S. A., & Mutula, S. (2019). Determinants of use of electronic information resources by the professoriate in Nigerian universities: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and utilization of technology model. South African Journal of Information Management, 21(1), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozudogru, F., & Hismanoglu, M. (2016). Views of freshmen students on foreign language courses delivered via E-learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton, A., Fooks, G., Maestri, G., & Lowe, P. (2020). Submission of evidence on the disproportionate impact of COVID 19, and the UK government response, on ethnic minorities and women in the UK. Aston University Publication. https://publicationsaston.ac.uk/id/eprint/41460/. Accessed 29 Sep 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royle, K., & Nikolic, J. (2013). Agile Digital Age Pedagogy for Teachers: ADAPT. http://legacy.naace.co.uk/2299. Accessed 30 July 2020.

  • Sahu, P. (2020). Closure of universities due to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Impact on education and mental health of students and academic staff. Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7541

  • Salloum, S. A. S., & Shaalan, K. (2018). Investigating students’ acceptance of E-learning system in higher educational environments in the UAE: Applying the extended technology acceptance model (TAM). The British University in Dubai.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selim, H. M. (2003). An empirical investigation of student acceptance of course websites. Computers & Education, 40(4), 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(02)00142-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shahzad, A., Hassan, R., Aremu, A. Y., Hussain, A., & Lodhi, R. N. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 in E-learning on higher education institution students: The group comparison between male and female. Quality & Quantity, 1–22.

  • Sun, PC, Tsai, RJ, Finger, G, Chen, YY, & Yeh, D (2008). What drives a successful e-learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183–1202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tai, D. B. G., Shah, A., Doubeni, C. A., Sia, I. G., & Wieland, M. L. (2020). The disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on racial and ethnic minorities in the United States. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 72(4), 703–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tam, C., & Oliveira, T. (2016). Understanding the impact of m-banking on individual performance: DeLone & McLean and TTF perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 233–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, P. J. B. (2013). Applying the UTAUT to understand factors affecting the use of English e-learning websites in Taiwan. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013503837

  • Tchoubar, T. (2014). Effective use of multimedia explanations in open e-learning environment fosters student success. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(1), 63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tu, C. H., & McIsaac, M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ülker, D., & Yılmaz, Y. (2016). Learning management systems and comparison of open-source learning management systems and proprietary learning management systems. Journal of Systems Integration, 7(2), 18–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2020). COVID-19 educational disruption and response. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse

  • Urbach, N., Smolnik, S., & Riempp, G. (2010). An empirical investigation of employee portal success. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 19(3), 184–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2010.06.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 425–478.

  • Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 157–178.

  • Vershitskaya, E. R., Mikhaylova, A. V., Gilmanshina, S. I., Dorozhkin, E. M., & Epaneshnikov, V. V. (2020). Present-day management of universities in Russia: Prospects and challenges of e-learning. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 611–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C., & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the digital networked world of the 21st century. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 403–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wahana Visi Indonesia (2020). Teacher Response Survey Results during the Covid-19 pandemic. https://wahanavisi.org/id/media-materi/media. Accessed 5 Aug 2020.

  • Wahyuni, D. S., Agustini, K., Sindu, I. G. P., & Sugihartini, N. (2020a). Analysis on vocational high school teacher competency gaps: Implication for VHS teacher training needs. In Journal of physics: Conference series (Vol. 1516, no. 1, p. 012051). IOP publishing.

  • Wahyuni, D., Sudira, P., Agustini, K., & Gede, A. (2020b). The effect of external learning on vocational high school performance with mediating role of instructional agility and product innovation efficacy in Indonesia. Management Science Letters, 10(16), 3931–3940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walters, K. , Shaw, M., De Gagne, J. C. (2010). Want to teach online? Things you should know. Journal of eLearning and Online Teaching.

  • Wang, Y., Wu, M., & Wang, H. (2009). Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 92–118 (14) (PDF) factors influencing Students' acceptance of M-learning: An investigation in higher Education. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284339985_Factors_Influencing_Students%27_Acceptance_of_M-Learning_An_Investigation_in_Higher_Education [accessed May 13 2021]

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, C. R. (2003). Criteria for evaluating the quality of online courses. Edmonton, Alberta: Alberta Distance and Training Association, 16(2), 185–200. https://elearning.typepad.com/thelearnedman/ID/evaluatingcourses.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Yahaya, Z. N., Yahaya, N. M., & Zain, N. N. B. M. (2017). Factors influencing mobile learning among higher education students in Malaysia. International Journal of Advanced Scientific Research and Management, 2(8), 86–91. http://www.ijasrm.com.  Accessed 15 Aug 2020.  

    Google Scholar 

  • Yulius, R. (2016). Voluntary moderation effect on online learning at the Suhid University, Surakarta. Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 10. 10.22216/jit.2016.v10i4.534

  • Zhu, C. (2012). Student satisfaction, performance, and knowledge construction in online collaborative learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 127–136.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Brawijaya, Malang, Indonesia

    Raden Edi Sewandono, Armanu Thoyib, Djumilah Hadiwidjojo & Ainur Rofiq

Authors
  1. Raden Edi Sewandono
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Armanu Thoyib
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Djumilah Hadiwidjojo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ainur Rofiq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raden Edi Sewandono.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

https://ub.ac.id/

UNIVERSITAS BRAWIJAYA has achieved an accreditation by The Alliance on Business Education and Scholarship for Tomorrow, a twenty-first century organization (ABEST21) for Accounting, Economics, and Management study programmes from Faculty of Economics and Business. UNIVERSITAS BRAWIJAYA is Indonesian State University.

Appendix A

Appendix A

Table 5

Table 5 Instrument Constructs and Indicators
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sewandono, R.E., Thoyib, A., Hadiwidjojo, D. et al. Performance expectancy of E-learning on higher institutions of education under uncertain conditions: Indonesia context. Educ Inf Technol 28, 4041–4068 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11074-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11074-9

Keywords