Chapter 7: Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations
3.4 Factors influencing Use of Web 2.0 for TAL
3.4.1 System Quality of Web 2.0 Technologies
One of the major dimensions of an information system success based on the D&M model is the System quality, which DeLone and McLean (1992) described as the desired characteristics of the IS itself which produces the information. System quality is considered as a multidimensional construct (Bhatti, Baile and Yasin 2011) because it provides an explanation for the usability and performance characteristics of a system (Urbach and Muller 2011). In the Web 2.0 environment, system quality is the anticipated features of Web 2.0 technologies that will positively influence users‟ attitude and use/intention to use the system (Delone and Mclean 2003; Trkman and Trkman 2009 and Lwoga 2013). System quality measures the functionality and desired features of the Web 2.0 tool, such as ease of use, usability, availability, reliability, response time (for example, download time) and accessibility (Delone and Mclean 2003 and DeLone and McLean 2004). Since the system is assumed to be admired by its users (Ozkan and Koseler 2009), as academics and students interact with these Web 2.0 technologies by using them for academic purposes, they are able to identify certain features that make them
58
useful for TAL. The system quality construct is expected to provide an explanation for these features and how they influence use of Web 2.0 by academics and students.
System quality has been operationalized in countless ways to include convenience of access, functionality, perceived usefulness (PU), adaptability, data quality, portability, ease of access, ease of learning, flexibility and integration of system and service, ease of learning and privacy (Delone and Mclean 2003; DeLone and McLean 2004; Lawrence 2011; Bhatti, Baile and Yasin 2011; Chua et al. 2012 and Lwoga 2013). System quality captures the notions of PEOU and PU in TAM; complexity and reliability in Diffusion of Innovation theory (DOI); and performance expectancy and effort expectancy in UTAUT. Similarly, Urbach, Smolnik and Riempp (2010) describe system quality as the degree to which a system is easy to use to accomplish tasks. PEOU according to (Venkatesh and Davis (2000:187) is “the extent to which a person believes that using the system will be free of effort”. Davis (1989) defines PU as the extent to which a person believes that using the system will improve his or her job performance. System quality (measured in terms of PEOU) can be explained as the extent to which academics and students believe they will be free of effort by using Web 2.0 technologies for TAL purposes. In terms of PU, it refers to how well academics and students believe that using Web 2.0 technologies would enhance their TAL activities. PEOU, PU and reliability have been shown to be important factors in studies relating to the use of the internet, web and ICT acceptance (Legris, Ingham and Collerette 2003). Hence, academics and students are more likely to use Web 2.0 technologies for TAL if they develop a positive attitude to the use of the system.
System quality is critical because having an easy-to-use technology is a key enabler of the users‟ engagement (Wagner and Majchrzak, 2006). Ease of use is the most valued characteristic of system quality (Hernandez, Martinez and De Hoyos 2006). Moreover, it is supposed that users will become more involved with the technology if it is easy and enjoyable (Waldrop 2008). Convenience of access is another measure of system quality (Trkman and Trkman 2009). If academics and students are able to conveniently access Web 2.0 applications or tools, this will give them better opportunities to access the education knowledge base for needed information on their academic tasks, especially from a global perspective. As implied from Trkman and Trkman's (2009) discussion, this will only happen if academics/colleagues and students/peers would work hard to create and maintain it as implied. In terms of system
59
quality, the two interrelated parts that should be considered (Trkman and Trkman 2009) are the software and the peripheral, that is, the hardware (Ozkan and Koseler 2009) quality. The software quality includes reliability, responsiveness, ease of use, stability, security, user- friendliness, well-organized design and personalization (Shee and Wang, 2008). The hardware quality (that is, the peripherals) comprises of the efficiency of microphones, earphones, electronic blackboards, electronic mail, online threaded discussion boards, synchronous chat, and desktop videoconferencing (Ozkan and Koseler 2009). The synchronous attribute was treated under media synchronicity.
The importance of system quality is related to the errors existing in a system, its ease of use, response time and flexibility (Wu and Wang, 2006). It is then apparent that the features expressed by these technologies play a vital part in evincing its competence to its users, thereby predicting attitude towards their use. Academics and students will see as indispensible a technology that brings fast results to their needs, obliquely influencing their attitude. These attributes are important to Web 2.0 integration in TAL since the higher the quality and reliability of used technology, the higher the learning effects will be (Hiltz 1993; Piccoli et al.
2001; Webster and Hackley 1997 cited in Sun et al. 2008).
System quality has been well-known to successfully explain user satisfaction and actual use of various technologies across several studies. For example, in the technology acceptance study (Motaghian, Hassanzadeh and Moghadam 2013), users behavior (Yoon 2009), ubiquitous computing (Kim et al. 2009), Greek taxation IS (Floropoulos, Spathis, Halvatzis and Tsipouridou 2010), use of the RFID integrated systems in libraries (Kapoor, Dwivedi and Lal 2013) and other studies, system quality was found to successfully explain users‟ attitude and actual use of technological systems. Dwivedi et al. (2013) in a study in the UK reported a significant influence of system quality (β=0.328, p=0.000) on actual use of RFID integrated systems. Petter, DeLone and McLean (2008) also recounted significant effects of system quality on system use in an analytical study of 18 different studies that used system quality construct. Kapoor, Dwivedi and Lal (2013) added that the greater the quality of a system, the greater the likelihood that the system would attract positive user intentions, and in turn be actually used. Ramayah and Lee‟s (2012) study on the use of the e-learning system among public universities students in Malaysia, indicated that system quality (β = 0.18, p < 0.01) is positively related to continuance intention to use the system. Trkman and Trkman (2009) also
60
found that system quality has a significant influence on use and user satisfaction. The result is similar to that of researchers such as DeLone and McLean (2003) and Holsapple and Lee-Post (2006).
A number of studies have supported the appropriateness of the system quality construct in explaining attitude and actual use of innovative technologies such as Web 2.0. A good system quality can help form positive user attitudes, and also support greater use of the technologies (Dwivedi et al. 2013). Studies such as Wang, Chou and Chang‟s (2009) who focused on the moderating role of utilitarian or hedonic user motivation on user behavior towards Web 2.0 applications in a university in Taiwan; Olatokun and Owoeye (2012) and Moon and Kim (2001), established a significant effect of system quality, perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness on users‟ attitude towards online technology usage. Ajjan and Hartshorne (2008) in their study on investigating academics‟ decisions to adopt Web 2.0 technologies, found that ease of use, usefulness, and compatibility of Web 2.0 are key determinants of academic's attitude toward the use of Web 2.0 technologies.
Hartshorne and Ajjan (2009) also examined factors that influence students' decisions to adopt Web 2.0 applications using the DTPB. It was shown that ease of use, usefulness and compatibility were key determinants of students‟ attitudes towards the use of Web 2.0 technologies. These findings suggest that system quality could also influence academics‟ and students‟ attitudes towards the use of technologies such as Web 2.0 in TAL. However, a contrary result was obtained in that Dwivedi et al. (2013) in their study discovered that perceived ease of use does not have a significant influence on users‟ attitude. Similarly, the outcome of Manochehri and Sharif‟s (2010) investigation on influence of classroom technology on a student‟s learning attitude in a university in Qatar shows that ease of use at an initial stage does not lead to increase in the use of classroom technologies. The study also noted that prior experience of ICT use does not impact on the students‟ attitude. The variability in results on the significance of service quality on users‟ attitude and satisfaction indicates that the application construct in different context could bring about different outcomes.
Anomalies in the quality of a system such as Web 2.0 technologies could affect academics and students‟ attitudes to use them for academic purposes. Trkman and Trkman (2009) had asserted that problems with system quality could reduce intention to use wikis even for advanced IT
61
users. This implies that challenges with system quality could interrupt academics‟ and students‟ decisions on using Web 2.0 technologies for TAL purposes. Essentially, there is a need to investigate on how system quality influences attitude towards use of Web 2.0 technologies for TAL practices especially in the university setting. In addition from the literature reviewed, system quality is understood to be a multidimensional construct with an embodiment of features that can affect use of technologies. Nevertheless, a critical review of literature revealed that studies involving the use of system quality construct tested its influence or effect on either use, intention to use or user‟s satisfaction as proposed in the original D&M model. Few researchers such as Petter and McLean (2009), Ajjan and Hartshorne (2008), Hartshorne and Ajjan(2009), Wang, Chou and Chang (2009), Floropoulos et al. (2010) and Kapoor, Dwivedi and Lal (2013) examined its influence on user‟s attitude with most of them using related attributes such as ease of use and PEOU to refer to System quality. To fill this gap, this study seeks to examine the influence of system quality on academics‟ and students‟
attitudes towards use of Web 2.0 technologies for TAL in Nigeria universities.