CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8Technology Adoption and User BehaviourOnline Learning Methods and InnovationsEducational Innovations and Technology

Penerimaan mahasiswa terhadap pembelajaran daring selama pandemi Covid-19 dengan pendekatan Technology Acceptance Model

Open access
Latifah, Nur, Rokhmawanto, Sulis, Purwanto, Purwanto, Syarifah, Laili·2021·Jurnal Inovasi Teknologi Pendidikan
DOI 10.21831/jitp.v8i2.39755
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Pandemi Covid-19 memberikan perubahan dalam proses pembelajaran di lembaga pendidikan termasuk pada pendidikan tinggi. Perubahan tersebut dapat dilihat dari pelaksanaan pembelajaran dalam satu tahun terakhir yang harus dilaksanakan secara daring. Pembelajaran daring dilaksanakan guna mendukung kebijakan pemerintah berupa Pembatasan Berskala Besar (PSBB). Para dosen telah berupaya melaksanakan pembelajaran daring dengan menggunakan berbagai aplikasi yang telah tersedia seperti zoom meeting, google meet, quiz dan aplikasi lainnya. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk membuktikan secara empiris terkait intention to use dalam pembelajaran daring dengan attitude sebagai variabel mediasi. Data penelitian sebanyak 297 yang dikumpulkan secara daring. Responden penelitian merupakan mahasiswa aktif di berbagai perguruan tinggi yang ada di Kabupaten Magelang. Data penelitian dianalisis structural equation modeling dengan menggunakan software Smart PLS. Hasil pengujian membuktikan bahwa pedagogic competence, perceived ease of use dan perceived usefulness dapat mempengaruhi attitude. Hasil pengujian lainnya membuktikan perceived usefulness dan attitude berpengaruh terhadap intention to use, namun pedagogic competence tidak terbukti. Hasil pengujian pengaruh tidak langsung dapat diketahui bahwa attitude dapat memediasi hubungan antara pedagogic competence, perceived ease of use dan perceived usefulness terhadap intention to use.Student acceptance of online learning during the Covid-19 pandemic with the Technology Acceptance Model approach AbstractCovid-19 pandemic provided a change in the learning process in educational institutions included in higher education. These changes could be seen from the implementation of learning in the past year which should be implemented online. Online learning was be implemented to support government policies in the form of Large-Scale Restrictions (PSBB). The lecturers had made efforts to implement online learning by using various available applications such as zoom meetings, google meet, quizzes, and other applications. This study aims to prove empirically the intention to use online learning with attitude as a mediating variable. The research data were 297 collected online. Research respondents were active students in various universities in Magelang Regency. The research data were analyzed structural equation modeling using Smart PLS software. The test results prove that pedagogic competence, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefulness could affect attitude. Other test results prove that perceived usefulness and attitude had an effect on the intention to use, but pedagogic competence is not proven. The results of the indirect effect test show that attitude can mediate the relationship between pedagogic competence, perceived ease of use, and perceived usefulness for intention to use.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.21831/jitp.v8i2.39755

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. Al-Adwan, A., Al-Adwan, A., & Smedley, J. (2016). Exploring students acceptance of e-learning using Technology Acceptance. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 9(2), 4-18.
  2. Al-Gahtani, S. S. (2016). Empirical investigation of e-learning acceptance and assimilation: A structural equation model. Applied Computing and Informatics, 12(1), 27-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aci.2014.09.001 · DOI
  3. Alradhawi, M., Shubber, N., Sheppard, J., & Ali, Y. (2020). Effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on mental well-being amongst individuals in society: A letter to the editor on "The socio- economic implications of the coronavirus and Covid-19 pandemic: A review". International Journal of Surgery, 78, 147-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.04.070 · DOI
  4. Chawala, D., & Joshi, H. (2019). Consumer attitude and intention to adopt mobile wallet in India - An empirical study. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 37(7), 1590-1618. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/IJBM-09-2018-0256 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.33621 · DOI
  6. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (2007). The Advantages of An Inclusive Definition of Attitude. Social Cognition, 25(5), 582-602.
  7. Fathema, N., Shannon, D., & Ross, M. (2015). Expanding The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to Examine Faculty Use of Learning Management Systems (LMSs) In Higher Education Institutions. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 210-232.
  8. From, J. (2017). Pedagogical Digital Competence-Between Values, Knowledge and Skills. Higher Education Studies, 7(2), 43. https://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v7n2p43 · DOI
  9. Gottems, L. B. D., Carvalho, E. M. P. De, Guilhem, D., & Pires, M. R. G. M. P. (2018). Good Practices in Normal Childbirth: Reliability Analysis of an Instrument by Cronbach ' s Alpha. Revista Lationo-Americana de Efermagem, 26(3), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1590/1518- 8345.2234.3000 · DOI
  10. Hair, Joe F, Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069- 6679190202 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Hair, Joseph F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203 · DOI · Paper page
  12. He, Y., Chen, Q., & Kitkuakul, S. (2018). Regulatory Focus and Technology Acceptance: Perceived Ease of use and Usefulness as efficacy. Cogent Business and Management, 5(1), 0-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2018.1459006 · DOI
  13. Henseler, J., Ringle, C., & Sinkovics, R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277-319. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014 · DOI
  14. 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2011.10782576 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Hossen, M. M., Chan, T. J., & Hasan, N. A. M. (2020). Mediating role of job satisfaction on internal corporate social responsibility practices and employee engagement in higher education sector. Contemporary Management Research, 16(3), 207-227. https://doi.org/10.7903/CMR.20334 · DOI
  16. Ibrahim, R., Leng, N. S., Yusoff, R. C. M., Samy, G. N., Masrom, S., & Rizman, Z. I. (2018). E- learning acceptance based on technology acceptance model (TAM). Journal of Fundamental and Applied Sciences, 9(4S), 871. https://doi.org/10.4314/jfas.v9i4s.50 · DOI
  17. Jayalath, C., Wickramasinghe, U., Kottage, H., & Somaratna, G. (2020). Factors influencing orderly transition to online deliveries during Covid-19 pandemic impact. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 9(2), 10-24. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2020/v9i230242 · DOI
  18. Ma, Y. J., Gam, H. J., & Banning, J. (2017). Perceived ease of use and usefulness of sustainability labels on apparel products: application of the technology acceptance model. Fashion and Textiles, 4(3), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-017-0093-1 · DOI
  19. Masrom, M. (2007). Technology acceptance model and E-learning. 12th International Conference on Education, May, 21-24.
  20. Memon, Y. J., Azhar, S. M., Haque, R., & Bhutto, N. A. (2019). Religiosity as a moderator between theory of planned behavior and halal purchase intention. Journal of Islamic Marketing, 10(4), 1351-1372.
  21. Moakofhi, M. K., Phiri, T. V., Leteane, O., & Bangomwa, E. (2019). Using Technology Acceptance Model to Predict Lecturers' Acceptance of Moodle: Case of Botswana University of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal, 10(1), 3103-3113. https://doi.org/10.20533/licej.2040.2589.2019.0407 · DOI
  22. Mulyanti, B., Purnama, W., & Pawinanto, R. E. (2020). Distance learning in vocational high schools during the Covid-19 pandemic in West Java Province, Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of Science & Technology, 5(2), 96-107. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17509/ijost.v5i2.24640 · DOI
  23. Ngampornchai, A., & Adams, J. (2016). Students' acceptance and readiness for E-learning in Northeastern Thailand. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-016-0034-x · DOI · Paper page
  24. Panggabean, M. S., & Himawan, K. K. (2016). The development of Indonesian teacher competence questionnaire. Journal of Educational, Health and Community Psychology, 5(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.12928/jehcp.v5i2.5134 · DOI
  25. Pradana, F., Bachtiar, F. A., & Priyambadha, B. (2019). Penilaian Penerimaan Teknologi E- Learning Pemrograman berbasis Gamification dengan Metode Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Jurnal Teknologi Informasi Dan Ilmu Komputer, 6(2), 163. https://doi.org/10.25126/jtiik.2019621288 · DOI
  26. Purwanto. (2021). Society Attitudes and Intentions To Use Products In Sharia Bank of Aceh: The Role of Religiosity and Social Influence. ABAC Journal, 41(2), 223-242.
  27. Rahmawati, R. N. M. N. (2019). Actual Usage Use of E-Learning With Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Jurnal Inovasi Teknologi Pendidikan, 6(2), 127-136.
  28. Ramirez-Anormaliza, R., Sabaté, F., & Guevara-Viejo, F. (2015). Evaluating Student Acceptance Level of E-Learning Systems. 8th Annual International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, November, 2393-2399. http://library.iated.org/view/RAMIREZANORMALIZA2015EVA
  29. Retnowati, E., Murdiyani, N. M., Marsigit, Sugiman, & Mahmudi, A. (2018). Improving pedagogic competence using an e-learning approach for pre-service mathematics teachers. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 983(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/983/1/012126 · DOI
  30. Salloum, S. A., Qasim Mohammad Alhamad, A., Al-Emran, M., Abdel Monem, A., & Shaalan, K. (2019). Exploring students' acceptance of e-learning through the development of a comprehensive technology acceptance model. IEEE Access, 7(2), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2939467 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Sukainah, A., Reski, P. P., Fadilah, R., & Mustarin, A. (2019). Application of Technology Acceptance Model to E-learning Assessment (Kelase) in Agricultural Technology Education, UniversitasNegeri Makassar. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1387(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1387/1/012115 · DOI
  32. Tehseen, S., Ramayah, T., & Sajilan, S. (2017). Testing and Controlling for Common Method Variance: A Review of Available Methods. Journal of Management Sciences, 4(2), 142-168. https://doi.org/10.20547/jms.2014.1704202 · DOI
  33. Vululleh, P. (2018). Determinants of students' e-learning acceptance in developing countries: An approach based on Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 14(1), 141-151.
  34. Yuen, A. H. K., & Ma, W. W. K. (2008). Exploring teacher acceptance of e-learning technology. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 229-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660802232779 · DOI
  35. Ziadat, M. T. A. L. (2015). Applications of Planned Behavior Theory (TPB) in Jordanian Tourism. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 7(3), 95-106. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v7n3p95 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Latifah, N., Rokhmawanto, S., Purwanto, P., & Syarifah, L.
ORCID
Purwanto, Purwanto
Venue
Jurnal Inovasi Teknologi Pendidikan
Publisher
Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
Published
2021-10-20
Volume
8
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 2407-0963 (ISSN-L)
  • 2460-7177
DOI
10.21831/jitp.v8i2.39755
OpenAlex
W3210977581
Cited by
8
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.78
Type
journal article
Language
id
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Jurnal Inovasi Teknologi Pendidikan (publishedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online Learning Methods and Innovations
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Innovations and Technology
Keywords
online learning, student acceptance, technology acceptance model, intention to use, mediating effect of attitude, pedagogic competence, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, COVID-19 pandemic, university students, online learning tools, Zoom, Google Meet, Quizizz, Magelang Regency, student engagement

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