An Investigation of Students’ Acceptance of Moodle in a Blended Learning Setting Using Technology Acceptance Model
Abstract
Moodle and other web-based learning systems have become very popular in higher education. Their success will not be achieved if students fail to use such systems. The present study investigates university student’s attitudes regarding the use of Moodle. Forty-seven students from a Moroccan university were involved in the study. The students attended a course in a blended learning environment. The technology acceptance model was used to assess their acceptance of the e-learning system. Structural equation modeling was employed with SmartPLS program to explain the students’ acceptance of the system. Data showed that technology acceptance model is still a solid theoretical model whose validity can extend to blended learning settings. The results point to the significant importance of computer self-efficacy and perceived usefulness in accounting for attitude and Moodle usage. Implications of the findings and limitations along with future research directions are also discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Students with higher AI literacy and engagement with smart learning tools tend to demonstrate enhanced critical thinking abilities.
“Research suggests that students with higher AI literacy and engagement with smart learning tools tend to demonstrate enhanced critical thinking abilities, as digital platforms provide opportunities for deeper exploration, access to diverse viewpoints, and instant feedback mechanisms [92].”
From Systematic literature review on critical thinking in higher education (2025) · cites this paper as [92]
Digital platforms provide opportunities for deeper exploration, access to diverse viewpoints, and instant feedback mechanisms.
“Research suggests that students with higher AI literacy and engagement with smart learning tools tend to demonstrate enhanced critical thinking abilities, as digital platforms provide opportunities for deeper exploration, access to diverse viewpoints, and instant feedback mechanisms [92].”
From Systematic literature review on critical thinking in higher education (2025) · cites this paper as [92]
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194 · see citing works
Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology
Davis, F. D. (1989) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/249008 · Cited by 68,483 · see citing works
Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing models
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.6.2.144 · Cited by 8,815 · see citing works
Empirical Evaluation of the Revised Technology Acceptance Model
Szajna, B. (1996) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.42.1.85 · Cited by 1,656 · see citing works
The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China
van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. L. (2008) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.001 · Cited by 940 · see citing works
Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P. J. (2002) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.1080/07421222.2002.11045699 · Cited by 707 · see citing works
Cross cultural analysis of the use and perceptions of web based learning systems
Arenas-Gaitán, J., Ramírez-Correa, P. E., & Javier Rondán-Cataluña, F. (2011) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.03.016 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review
Granić, A., & Marangunić, N. (2019) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/bjet.12864 · Cited by 1,204 · see citing works
Systematic literature review on critical thinking in higher education
Rothinam, N., Vengrasalam, R., Naidu, S., Nachiappan, S., & Jabamoney, S. (2025) · Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology · doi:10.55214/25768484.v9i5.7377 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
“Research suggests that students with higher AI literacy and engagement with smart learning tools tend to demonstrate enhanced critical thinking abilities, as digital platforms provide opportunities for deeper exploration, access to diverse viewpoints, and instant feedback mechanisms [92].”
- Authors
- Yeou, M.
- Affiliations
- Chouaib Doukkali University (MA)
- Corresponding author
- Yeou, Mohamed
- ORCID
- Yeou, Mohamed
- Venue
- Journal of Educational Technology Systems
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-01-28
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 300-318
- ISSN
- 0047-2395 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-3810
- OpenAlex
- W2293022861
- Cited by
- 141
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 5
- FWCI
- 22.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Educational Technology Systems (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and E-Learning
- Keywords
- Moodle, technology acceptance model, blended learning, student attitudes, e-learning adoption, computer self-efficacy, perceived usefulness, university students, web-based learning system
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
