Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Examining pre-service teachers’ acceptance of technology-rich learning environments: A UAE case study

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

Abstract

This study addressed the extent to which pre-service teachers at a teachers’ college in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) accepted and intended to utilize technology-rich learning environments in their future teaching practice. The effect of other significant factors on their overall acceptance, such as computer self-efficacy (CSE) and Perceived User Resources, was investigated. A final aim was to confirm the applicability of the instruments employed in this study within the unique sociocultural context of the UAE. Questionnaires utilizing a modified version of the technology acceptance model (TAM) were used to collect data. Respondents indicated strong acceptance of technology-rich learning environments. In the model, Perceived Usefulness and CSE were the two strongest predictors of Behavioral Intention. The results also supported the validity of TAM-based research within the Emirati sociocultural environment.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdalla, I. (2007). Evaluating effectiveness of e-blackboard system using TAM framework: A structural analysis approach. AACE Journal, 15(3), 279–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abu Dhabi Education Council (2013). New school model. Retrieved on March 21, 2016, From: http://www.adec.ac.ae/en/Education/P12Education/Pages/New-School-Model.aspx

  • Abu Dhabi Government (2013). ADEC rolls out iClass in 15 schools next year. Retrieved on March 21, 2016, from: https://www.abudhabi.ae/egovPoolPortal_WAR/appmanager/ADeGP/Citizen?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=p_citizen_homepage_hidenav&did=339916&lang=en

  • Afshari, M., Bakar, K., Luan, W., Samah, B., & Fooi, F. (2009). Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communication technology. International Journal of Instruction, 2(1), 77–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akbulut, Y., Odabasi, H. F., & Kuzu, A. (2011). Perceptions of preservice teachers regarding the integration of information and communication technologies in Turkish education facilities. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10, 175–184 Retrieved on March 16, 2016, from: http://www.tojet.net/articles/v10i3/10320.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akir, Z. I. (2006). Impact of information and communication technology on teaching and training: A qualitative systematic review (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3226697).

  • Al-hawari, M. A., & Mouakket, S. (2010). The influence of technology acceptance model (TAM) factors on students' e-satisfaction and e-retention within the context of UAE e-learning. Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues, 3(4), 299–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aypay, A., Celik, H. C., Aypay, A., & Sever, M. (2012). Technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers in Turkey. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11, 264–272 Retrieved on March 16, 2016, from: http://www.tojet.net/articles/v11i4/11426.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babic, S. (2012). Factors that influence academic teacher's acceptance of e-learning technology in blended learning environment. In A. Guelfi (Ed.), E-learning-organizational infrastructure and tools for specific areas (pp. 3–17). Rijeka: InTech Retrieved on October 3, 2017, from http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/28695.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 244–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bahr, D. L., Shaha, S. H., Farnsworth, B. J., Lewis, V. K., & Benson, L. F. (2004). Preparing tomorrow’s teachers to use technology: Attitudinal impacts of technology-supported field experience on pre-service teacher candidates. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31, 88–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, A. W., & Poole, G. (2003). Effective teaching with technology in higher education: Foundations for success. Indianapolis: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (Eds.). (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benbasat, I., & Barki, H. (2007). Quo vadis TAM? Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 211–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, L. (2013). Technology integration and teachers: A framework for professional development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale.

  • Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2013). Flipping for mastery. Educational Leadership, 71(4), 24–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, J., Lieu, P., Liang, J., Liu, H., & Wong, S. (2011). Factors influencing technology acceptance decisions. African Journal of Business Management, 5(7), 2901–2909.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chow, P. (2015). Teachers’ attitudes towards technology in the classroom. Retrieved on October 3, 2017, from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/68680/1/Chow_Paul_DL_201506_MT_MTRP.pdf

  • Clark, C. (2013). A phenomenological study of the impact of pre-service and in-service training regarding the integration of twenty-first century technologies into selected teachers’ instruction (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3559753).

  • Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darby, V. M. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of infusing technology in elementary classrooms to strengthen instructional practices (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale.

  • Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeNeui, D. L., & Dodge, T. L. (2006). Asynchronous learning networks and student outcomes: The utility of online learning components in hybrid courses. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 33, 256–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erlandson, B. E., Nelson, B. C., & Savenye, W. C. (2010). Collaboration modality, cognitive load, and science inquiry learning in virtual inquiry environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58, 693–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferdousi, B. J. (2009). A study of factors that affect instructors’ intention to use e-learning systems in 2-year colleges (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3352474).

  • Fernández-Sánchez, M., & Valverde Berrocoso, J. (2014). A community of practice: An intervention model based on computer supported collaborative learning. Comunicar, 21(42), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.3916/C42-2014-09.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, I. & Hasnaoui, A. (2010). Information and communication technologies (ICT): A tool to implement and drive corporate social responsibility (CSR). Retrieved on October 6, 2017, from https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00495968/document

  • Gonzalez, Y. (2012). An analysis of teachers’ concerns toward the implementation of instructional technology in the curriculum (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale.

  • Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38, 246–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, A. (2012). An evaluation of teaching strategies using computer technology (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale.

  • Gruszczynska, A., Merchant, G., & Pountney, R. (2013). Digital futures in teacher education: Exploring open approaches towards digital literacy. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 11(3), 193–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heineman, B. (2011). Effects of blended-model training on technostress in new teachers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale.

  • Hess, T. J., McNab, A. L., & Basoglu, K. A. (2014). Reliability and generalizability of perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and behavioral intentions. MIS Quarterly, 38, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holden, H., & Rada, R. (2011). Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self-efficacy on teachers’ technology acceptance. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4), 343–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J. (2010). The role of teacher knowledge and learning experiences in forming technology-integrated pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 5, 277–302 Retrieved on March 28, 2016, from http://www.editlib.org/p/4622/.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyamu, E. O. S., & Aduwa Ogiegbaen, S. E. (2005). Assessment of the use of educational technology by social studies teachers in secondary schools in western Nigeria. E-Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 8(1) Retrieved on March 16, 2016, from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/e-jist/docs/vol8_no1/commentary/assess_ed_tech.htm.

  • Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (2008). Educational technology: A definition with commentary. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jimoyiannis, A., & Komis, V. (2007). Examining teachers’ beliefs about ICT in education: Implications of a teacher preparation programme. Teacher Development, 11(2), 149–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, G. (2008). The relative learning benefits of synchronous and asynchronous text-based discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 166–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00739.x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2010). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., Howland, J., Moore, J., & Marra, R. M. (2003). Learning to solve problems with technology (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiraz, E., & Ozdemir, D. (2006). The relationship between educational ideologies and technology acceptance in pre-service teachers. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 9, 152–165 Retrieved on March 16, 2016, from http://www.ifets.info/journals/9_2/13.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2013). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: What is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, Media and Technology, 39, 6–36 Retrieved March 3, 2016 from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ku, C. H. (2009). Extending the technology acceptance model using perceived user resources in higher education web-based online education courses (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3357904).

  • Kusano, K., Frederiksen, S., Jones, L., Kobayashi, M., Mukoyama, Y., Yamagishi, T., et al. (2013). The effects of ICT environment on teachers’ attitudes and technology integration in Japan and the U.S. Journal of Information Technology Education, 12, 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurillard, D. (2007). Modelling benefits-oriented costs for technology enhanced learning. Higher Education, 54(1), 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laurillard, D. (2013). Foreword to the second edition. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning (2nd ed., pp. xvi–xviii). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leard Statistics (2013). Multiple regression in SPSS. Retrieved on March 18, 2016, from https://statistics.laerd.com/premium/mr/multiple-regression-in-spss.php

  • Lee, M., & Winzenried, A. (2009). The use of instructional technology in schools. Victoria: ACER Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litz, D., & Blaik Hourani, R. (2016). Developing educational capital in times of change: The experience of Abu Dhabi. In I. R. Haslem and M. S. Khine (Eds.), Leveraging social capital in systemic education reform (pp. 115–141). Rotterdam: Sense.

  • Litz, D., & Scott, S. (2017). Transformational leadership in the educational system of the United Arab Emirates. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(4), 566–587.

  • Liu, S.-H. (2012). A multivariate model of factors influencing technology use by preservice teachers during practice teaching. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15, 137–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macpherson, R., Kachelhoffer, P., & El Nemr, M. (2007). The radical modernization of school and educational system leadership in the United Arab Emirates: Towards indigenized and educative leadership. International Studies in Education Administration, 35(1), 60–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maksimenko, T. A., Tebenova, K. S., Bobrova, V. V., & Sakayeva, A. N. (2013). Practical assistance to children with disabilities in inclusive education. Education and Science Without Borders, 4(7), 105–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marinagi, C., Skourlas, C., & Belsis, P. (2013). Employing ubiquitous computing devices and technologies in the higher education classroom of the future. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 73, 487–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathieson, K., Peacock, E., & Chin, W. W. (2001). Extending the technology acceptance model: The influence of perceived user resources. The Data Base for Advances in. Information Systems, 32(2), 86–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayes, T., & Defreitas, S. (2013). Technology enhanced learning: Role of theory. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning (2nd ed., pp. 17–30). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohamed, A., & Hassanein, I. (2012). Educational technology and teacher training: Challenges and solutions. Paper presented at the 2nd Annual International Conference on Education and E-Learning, Bali, Indonesia.

  • Monsef, Y. (2005). ICT-based education in the Arab countries: Experiences and lessons learnt. In I. Osta (Ed.), Education and information technology in the Arab countries: Issues and trends (pp. 179–208). Beirut: Lebanese Association for Educational Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, K., Courier, M., & Joseph, G. (2011). Teaching tip: An investigation of digital literacy needs of students. Journal of Information Systems Education, 22, 95–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, A. M. (2011). Introduction: Learning with technology. In A. M. O’Donnell, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 1–14). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pallent, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (4th ed.). New York: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pan, C. C. (2003). System use of WebCT in the light of the technology acceptance model: A student perspective (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 305251531).

  • Passey, D., Laferriere, T., Ahmad, M. Y., Bhowmik, M., Gross, D., Price, J., Resta, P., & Shonfeld, M. (2016). Educational digital technologies in developing countries challenge third party providers. Educational Technology & Society, 19, 121–133 Retrieved on May 4, 2017, from http://www.ifets.info/journals/19_3/12.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Picciano, A. G., & Seaman, J. (2009). K-12 online learning: A 2008 follow-up of the survey of U.S. School District Administrators. Newburyport: Sloan Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randeree, K., & Narwani, A. (2009). Managing change in higher education: An exploration of the role of training in ICT enabled institutions in the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Learning, 16, 447–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, T. C., & Oh, E. G. (2017). The goals and methods of educational technology research over a quarter century (1989-2014). Education Technology Research and Development, 65(325–329), 325. Retrieved on August 1, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9474-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roehl, A., Reddy, S. L., & Shannon, G. J. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through active learning. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 105(2), 44–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romiszowski, A. J. (2004). How’s the e-learning baby? Factors leading to success or failure of an educational technology innovation. Educational Technology, 44(1), 5–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saha, S., & Upadhyay, S. (2013). Differences between educational technology, instructional technology and information & communication technology. Retrieved on March 21, 2016, from http://ict3year.wikispaces.com

  • Saleh, W. H. (2007). Instructional technology barriers and computer self-efficacy of university faculty in Lebanon (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale.

  • Säljö, R. (2010). Digital tools and challenges to institutional traditions of learning: Technologies, social memory and the performative nature of learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009. 00341.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, B., & Quirke, P. (2002). Let my laptop lead the way: A Middle Eastern study. Educational Technology and Society, 5, 135–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shao, R. M. (2012). Faculty concerns about the perceptions of adopting instructional technology at Tumaini University, Tanzania (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale.

  • Siegel, D. M. (2008). Accepting technology and overcoming resistance to change using the motivation and acceptance model (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3319274).

  • Simonson, M. (2003). Educational technology: Review of the field. Retrieved on March 21, 2016, from the Nova Southeastern University website: http://www.schoolofed.nova.edu/~simsmich/pdf/ed_tech_review.pdf

  • Simsek, N. (2005). Perceptions and opinions of educational technologists related to educational technology. Educational Technology & Society, 8, 178–190.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Smaldino, S. E., Lowther, D. L., & Russell, J. D. (2008). Instructional technology and media for learning (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strickland, J. S. (2003). An exploration of the integration of technology into teacher education (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3093701).

  • Teo, T. (2011). Efficiency of the technology acceptance model to explain pre-service teachers’ intention to use technology. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 28, 93–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teo, T., & Noyes, J. (2014). Explaining the intention to use technology among pre-service teachers: A multi-group analysis of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(1), 51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teo, T., Lee, C. B., & Chai, C. S. (2008a). Understanding pre-service teachers’ computer attitudes: Applying and extending the technology acceptance model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 128–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teo, T., Luan, W. S., & Sing, C. C. (2008b). A cross-cultural examination of the intention to use technology between Singaporean and Malaysian pre-service teachers: An application of the technology acceptance model (TAM). Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11, 265–280 Retrieved on March 16, 2016, from http://www.ifets.info/journals/11_4/19.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thatcher, J. B., Zimmer, C., Gundlach, M. J., & McKnight, D. H. (2008). Internal and external dimensions of computer self-efficacy: An empirical study. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55, 628–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, M. P., Crow, S. R., & Franklin, L. L. (2011). Information literacy and information skills instruction: Applying skills to practice in the 21st century school library (3rd ed.). Santa Barbara: Greenwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, C. C., & Chai, C. S. (2012). The “third”-order barrier for technology-integration instruction: Implications for teacher education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28, 1057–1060.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, P. (2013). The effects of teacher-led professional development on the integration of technology in instruction (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale.

  • Tweed, S. (2013). Technology implementation: Teacher age, experience, self-efficacy, and professional development as related to classroom technology integration. Retrieved on October 5, 2017, from http://dc.etsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2266&context=etd

  • Uys, P., Klapdor, T., Fell, R., Greening, P., Bristow, P., Salway, V. & Whitbourn, C. (2017). CSU learning technologies framework. Retrieved on October 6, 2017, from http://www.csu.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/2171604/csulearningtechnologiesframework.pdf

  • Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Sciences, 46, 86–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waxman, H. C., Lin, M. F., & Michko, G. M. (2003). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of teaching and learning with technology on student outcomes. Naperville: Learning Point Associates Retrieved on March 28, 2016, from http://treeves.coe.uga.edu/edit6900/metaanalysisNCREL.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winbash, W. (2011, August 31). Educational technology or instructional technology? Examiner. Retrieved on March 16, 2016, from http://www.examiner.com/article/educational-technology-or-instructional-technology

  • Yusuf, N., & Al-Banawi, N. (2013). The impact of changing technology: The case of e-learning. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 6(2), 173–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaman, S. (2012). More public schools to introduce technology-based learning. Gulf News. Retrieved on March 16, 2016, from http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/uae/education/more-public-schools-to-introduce-technology-based-learning-1.1043582

Download references

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Educational Leadership and Language Division, Emirates College for Advanced Education, PO Box 126662, Abu Dhabi, UAE

    Scott Parkman & David Litz

  2. Curriculum and Instructional Technology Division, Emirates College for Advanced Education, PO Box 126662, Abu Dhabi, UAE

    Nicolas Gromik

Authors
  1. Scott Parkman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Litz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicolas Gromik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Litz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Parkman, S., Litz, D. & Gromik, N. Examining pre-service teachers’ acceptance of technology-rich learning environments: A UAE case study. Educ Inf Technol 23, 1253–1275 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9665-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9665-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation