• Tidak ada hasil yang ditemukan

System quality, Information quality and Service quality in the Use of Web 2.0 Technologies for TAL Purposes

5.3.3 Factors Influencing Use of Web 2.0 Technologies for TAL Purposes

5.3.3.1 System quality, Information quality and Service quality in the Use of Web 2.0 Technologies for TAL Purposes

The second research question was to determine how system quality, information quality, and service quality influenced attitude towards use of Web 2.0 technologies for TAL purposes. To answer this research question, the researcher relied on the responses of various statements presented in Tables 11, 12 and 13 respectively.

125

Table 11: Influence of System Quality on Attitude towards Use of Web 2.0 Technologies for TAL Purposes

System Quality Academics (N= 195) Students (N =331)

Undecided Strongly agree, Agree

Disagree, Strongly disagree

Undecided Strongly agree, Agree

Disagree, Strongly

disagree I find Web 2.0

technologies easy

to use

17(8.7%) 173(88.7%) 5(2.6%) 27(8.2%) 284(85.8%) 20(6%)

Web 2.0

technologies are reliable for teaching/learning

21(10.8%) 166(85.1%) 8(4.1%) 13(3.9%) 284(85.8%) 34(10.3%)

Web 2.0

technologies make it easy for me collaborate to with my colleagues/peers

22(11.3%) 166(85.1%) 7(3.6%) 21(6.3%) 282(85.2%) 28(8.5%)

Web 2.0

technologies make teaching/learning easy

27(13.8%) 161(82.6%) 7(3.6%) 17(5.1%) 271(81.9%) 43(13%)

Web 2.0

technologies help me accomplish my teaching/academic tasks more quickly

29(14.9%) 158(81.0) 8(4.1%) 15(4.5%) 282(85.2%) 34(10.3%)

I find Web 2.0 technologies useful in

teaching/learning

24(12.3%) 165(84.6%) 6(3.1%) 9(2.7%) 289(87.3%) 33(10%)

Results in Table 11 revealed that 88.7% of the respondents strongly agreed or agreed that they find Web 2.0 technologies easy to use, 85.1% were of the opinion that Web 2.0 technologies make it easy for them to collaborate with colleagues and that they are reliable for teaching.

About 84.6% strongly agreed or agreed that they found Web 2.0 technologies useful in teaching, while 82.6% noted that the technologies make teaching easy and 81% strongly agreed or agreed that Web 2.0 technologies enabled them to accomplish teaching tasks more quickly.

Notably, the majority of the respondents were of the opinion that all the measures of system quality have positive influence on the use of Web 2.0 technologies for teaching purposes while very few (less than 5%) disagreed or strongly disagreed on this. However, few (less than 15%) were not sure of their responses.

126

Similarly, results in Table 12 showed that the majority of students (87.3%) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that I find Web 2.0 technologies useful in learning; I find Web 2.0 technologies easy to use (85.8%) and that Web 2.0 technologies are reliable for learning purposes (85.8%); 85.2% each agreed or strongly agreed that Web 2.0 technologies make it easy to collaborate with their peers and accomplish academic tasks more quickly; and 81.9% of the respondents agreed/strongly agreed that Web 2.0 technologies made learning easy.

Table 12: Influence of Information Quality on Attitude to Use of Web 2.0 Technologies for TAL Information Quality (IQ) Academics (N= 195) Students (N =331)

Undecided Strongly agree, Agree

Disagree, Strongly disagree

Undecided Strongly agree, Agree

Disagree, Strongly disagree Web 2.0 technologies

make it easy for me to prepare/obtain

teaching/learning materials

15(7.7%) 170(87.2%) 10(5.1%) 13(3.9%) 283(85.5%) 35(10.6%)

Web 2.0 technologies provide me with

sufficient information for teaching/learning

21(10.8%) 146(74.9%) 28(14.4%) 16(4.8%) 266(80.4%) 49(14.8%)

Web 2.0 technologies allow information to be accurately presented

30(15.4%) 145(74.4%) 20(10.3%) 38(11.5%) 258(77.9%) 35(10.6%)

Information provided are

clear and unambiguous 28(14.4%) 150(76.9%) 17(8.7%) 39(11.8%) 227(68.6%) 65(19.6%) Information

transferred/received using Web 2.0 technologies are timely

27(13.8%) 160(82.1%) 8(4.1%) 38(11.5%) 244(73.7%) 49(14.8%)

Web 2.0 technologies provide up-to-date information

22(11.3%) 165(84.6%) 8(4.1%) 30(9.1%) 260(78.5%) 41(12.4%)

Information provided by Web 2.0 technologies are meaningful

27(13.8%) 160(82.1%) 8(4.1%) 32(9.7%) 264(79.8%) 35(10.6%)

Results in Table 12 revealed that the majority of academics strongly agreed or agreed that Web 2.0 technologies made it easy for them to obtain and prepare teaching materials (87.2%); Web 2.0 technologies provided up-to-date information (84.6%); 82.1% were in agreement with the statement that information transferred or received using Web 2.0 technologies was timely and information provided by Web 2.0 technologies was meaningful; 76.9% strongly agreed or

127

agreed that information provided was clear and unambiguous, 74.9% said that Web 2.0 technologies provided sufficient information for teaching, and 74.4% that Web 2.0 technologies allowed information to be accurately presented. Interestingly, a major percentage of academics who participated in the study were in agreement with all of the statements. On the whole, the results showed that information quality influenced use of Web 2.0 technologies for teaching purposes.

Furthermore, results in Table 12 also showed the response of students to the statements. The results revealed the majority of student-respondents supported the statement that information quality had positive influence on use of Web 2.0 technologies for learning purposes. For instance, the majority of students (85.5%) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that

“Web 2.0 technologies make it easy for me to prepare/obtain learning materials”; 80.4%, “Web 2.0 technologies provide me with sufficient information for learning”; 79.8%, “Information provided by Web 2.0 technologies is meaningful” and 73.7%, “Information transferred/received using Web 2.0 technologies is timely”. The results suggest that information quality had a positive influence on use of Web 2.0 technologies for learning.

Table 13: Influence of Service Quality on Attitude to Use of Web 2.0 Technologies for TAL Service Quality (SQ) Academics (N= 195) Students (N =331)

Undecided Strongly agree, Agree

Disagree, Strongly disagree

Undecided Strongly agree, Agree

Disagree, Strongly disagree Web 2.0 technologies

provide reliable and prompt support for teaching/learning

(10.8%) 21 164

(84.1%) 10(5.1%) 18(5.4%) 273(82.5%) 40(12.1%)

Web 2.0 technologies have up-to-date hardware and software that help in delivering/receiving instructional materials

(17.9%) 35 139

(71.3%) 21(10.8%) 25(7.6%) 277(83.7%) 29(8.8%)

I have sufficient

understanding about the use of Web 2.0

technologies for

teaching/learning purposes

(12.3%) 24 135

(69.2%) 36(18.5%) 21(6.3%) 269(81.3%) 41(12.4%)

Information are sent/delivered securely using Web 2.0

technologies

(19.5%) 38 121

(62.1%) 36(18.5%) 27(8.2%) 225(68%) 79(23.9%)

128

Results in Table 13 revealed that the majority of academics strongly agreed or agreed that Web 2.0 technologies provide reliable and prompt support for teaching (84.1%); Web 2.0 technologies have up-to-date hardware and software that help in delivering instructional materials (71.3%); academics had sufficient understanding about the use of Web 2.0 technologies for teaching purposes (69.2%) and information was sent and delivered securely using Web 2.0 technologies (62.1%). Results showed that majority of the academics were in agreement with the statements that stated that service quality had positive influence on use of Web 2.0 technologies for teaching purposes.

The results further revealed that majority of students strongly agreed or agreed that Web 2.0 technologies have up-to-date hardware and software that help in delivering instructional materials (83.7%); Web 2.0 technologies provide reliable and prompt support for teaching purposes (82.5%); students had sufficient understanding about the use of Web 2.0 technologies for learning purposes (81.3%); and information was sent and delivered securely using Web 2.0 technologies (68%). The results seem to suggest that service quality has an important influence on use of Web 2.0 technologies for learning purposes.