The UTAUT model has been validated in numerous studies in different contexts since 2003 and was introduced in the educational field in 2010 (Khechine, Lakhal, Pascot, & Bytha, 2014). Previously most teachers followed training courses using the traditional approach through lecturing or distance learning using handouts. Nowadays, teachers have access to the internet which offers option of following training courses online. Therefore, teachers’
beliefs about online learning have to be studied. UTAUT identifies the key factors that influence the intention of accepting technology as measured by behavioural intention to use and the actual usage of technology. Ajzen et al. (1986) attested that beliefs influence behaviours. Other researchers claimed that teachers’ beliefs are reflected by certain behaviours, as beliefs affect teachers’ practices and decision making (Kane, Sandretto, &
Heath, 2002; Ng, Nicholas & Williams, 2010). The researchers also stressed the point that teachers’ behaviours do not change without alterations in beliefs. Thus, the behavioural intention to use and current usage of technology of teachers is influenced by their beliefs.
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989; Davis, Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1989) and TAM 2 (TAM extension) can predict successful technology adoption only to 30%
and 40% of the time respectively. UTAUT has merged 32 variables found in eight existing models, namely: Motivational Model (MM) (Davis, Bagozzi and Warshaw, 1992), Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) (Fishbein and
62
Ajzen, 1975), The theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991), Combined TAM and TPB (CTAM-TPB) (Taylor and Todd 1995), Model of PC utilisation (MPCU) (Thompson, Higgins & Howell 1991; Triandis 1977), Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) (Rogers, 1995), and Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura 1986; Compeau & Higgins, 1995; Compeau, Higgins
& Huff, 1999). The eight models have been reviewed and consolidated to develop UTAUT.
This model increases the prediction of successful technology adoption or usage intention to 70% (Shaper & Pervan, 2007; Venkatesh et al., 2003) whereas TAM model can merely predict about 40% reliably. But later on, some researchers have found that UTAUT has lower explanatory power to explain the variance in behavioural intention, for example, 63.1% (Al- Gahtani, Hubona, & Wang, 2007), 64.5% (Wang & Shih, 2009), in 2011 Teo found that only 35.3% of the variance can be explained without interactions and 39.1% with interactions.
UTAUT has been used in this study to understand teachers’ beliefs about OPD usage.
UTAUT identifies four important constructs acting as direct determinants of behavioural intentions and, consequently, the actual personal usage of technology. The constructs are performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions.
There are also four control variables, gender, age, experiences and voluntariness of use (see Figure 3.1). The factor of “gender” has been removed in the framework, as gender issue will not be considered in this study
Effort expectancy (EE) is described as “the degree of ease associated with the use of the system” (Venkatesh et al., 2003, p. 450), which refers to teachers’ beliefs of how much effort will be needed to use technology for TPD. The effort expectancy is also affected by teachers’ attitudes towards technology to enhance TPD. If teachers have negative attitudes towards OTPD, they are very unlikely to engage in such learning activities. But this tends to occur only at the initial stage of OPD adoption and become less salient at a later stage.
According to Abu-al-Aish and Love (2013) as users gain experience over time their perceptions change. Studies have shown a more positive influence of effort expectancy on behavioural intention in general (Im et al., 2011; Jairak et al., 2009; Nassuora, 2012).
63
Figure 3.1: UTAUT Model Source: Venkatesh et al., 2003) Performance
Expectancy
Effort Expectancy
Social Influence
Facilitating Conditions
Age Experience Voluntariness
of Use Behavioural
Intention
Use Behaviour
64
Table 3.1: Summary of UTAUT constructs and models from which they derive
Construct Description of Perception Similar Construct and
Corresponding Models Performance
Expectancy
The degree to which an individual believes that using the system will help him or her to attain gains in job performance
Perceived usefulness
(TAM/TAM2 & C-TAMTPB);
- Extrinsic motivation (MM);
- Relative advantage (IDT);
- Job-fit (MPCU);
- Outcome expectations (SCT).
Effort Expectancy The degree of ease associated with the use of the system.
-Perceived ease of use (TAM/TAM2);
- Complexity (MPCU);
- Ease of use (IDT).
Social Influence The degree to which an individual perceives that important others believe he or she should use the new systems.
-Subjective norms (TRA, TAM2, TPB/DTPB and C- TAM-TPB);
- Social factors (MPCU);
- Image (IDT).
Facilitating Conditions
Refer to consumers’ perceptions of the resources and support available to perform a behaviour Venkatesh et al. (2003).
-Perceived behavioural control (TPB/DTPB, C-TAM-TPB);
-Facilitating conditions (MPCU);
- Compatibility (IDT).
Table 3.1 provides a brief summary of each UTAUT construct, with a summary and the model from which each construct was derived. It also provides evidence of similarities among some of the models combined to form the UTAUT model (Attuquayefio & Addo, 2014). For example, an improvement of TRA and TAM resulted in TPB and these were combined to form C-TAM-TPB (Taylor & Todd, 1995). C-TAM-TPB is similar to TAM, but offers additional factors which are subjective norm and perceived behaviour control. These factors are not in TAM (Ajzen & Brown, 1991). But the prediction of ICT usage is better with TAM than C-TAM-TPB (Attuquayefio & Addo, 2014).
The study explored the effect of the different constructs on the behavioural intention of secondary teachers towards online professional development. Three constructs have been selected from the model of UTAUT (social influence, performance expectancy, facilitating conditions) and another three constructs (content knowledge, strategies, and media) from the
65
teacher learning model. Effort expectancy from the UTAUT model has not been considered as it occurs only at the early stage of OPD adoption and will become less salient at a later stage. Moreover, in their research, Zhou et al. (2010) and Yu (2012) were unable to find the link concerning EE and behavioural intention (BI).
Many models and theories have recently been used to outline the link among user’s beliefs and BIs to use the technology, for example innovation diffusion theory (IDT), TRA, TPB, the motivational model, TAM and a hybrid model merging constructs from TPB and TAM (Venkatesh et al., 2012; Yi et al., 2006; Yousafzai, 2012), the model of perceived credibility (PC) utilisation, the social cognitive theory. UTAUT is an evaluation and combination of these models. The rationale for including UTAUT as part of the study’s conceptual framework is that it has confirmed to be a valid research instrument and tool that can predict adoption behaviour and BI with importance on performance expectancy (PE) and voluntariness which are the most important drivers of technology acceptance (Al-Qeisi, 2009). UTAUT has been used in many fields such as forestry, education, banking, tourism, large organisations and business environments. Consequently, due to its simplicity and robustness, it has become one of the most widely used models (Foon & Fah, 2011; Tarhini et al., 2015; Venkatesh et al., 2012). But UTAUT has to be tested in numerous environments to consolidate its empirical basis. On the other hand, UTAUT has limitations. The initial UTAUT model focuses on large organisations, thus limiting its explanatory power.
UTAUT’s constructs would probably be not enough for explaining user’s new technology acceptance in a non-profit organisation. Thus, more studies using UTAUT need to be carried out, especially in developing countries.
3.2.1 How do “facilitating conditions” predict teachers’ beliefs about OPD?
Facilitating conditions (FC) refer to conditions that the users consider to exist as support in using the technology (Venkatesh et al., 2003), such as training, technical support, instructor or peer support and any additional resources. Teachers will move towards OPD if the facilitating conditions are present mostly at their workplace. For example, the school must be equipped with Wi-Fi and also provide technical support whenever required.
66
3.2.2 How is “performance expectancy” a factor in predicting teachers’ beliefs about OPD?
PE focuses on the belief that the usage of OPD will help to boost teachers’ work.
Teachers’ beliefs can to an extent be classified in terms of gender or age groups, and this construct has been described as the most powerful in predicting behavioural intention in UTAUT. How teachers perceive the technology will directly influence their performance expectancy as teachers make meaning about innovations according to their personal beliefs (Pajares, 1992). Therefore, teachers will tend to accept innovations such as OPD, which are linked to their own conceptions about PD also about teaching and learning. The content of OPD must provide opportunities to enhance teaching and learning in the teacher’s classroom so that the teacher believes in the performance expectancy of OPD.
3.2.3 How is “social influence” a factor in predicting teachers’ beliefs about OPD?
Social influence denotes the degree to which an individual perceives as important that others (such as line managers, peers) believe that he or she should use OTPD. This has a direct influence on behavioural intention. Positive social influences will positively impact on their behavioural intention to use technology for TPD. This construct shapes teachers’
intention to use new technology. As teachers normally work in isolation, despite modern trends to teach collaboratively or in teams, it will be difficult to share, for example, their technical problems with regard to technology as they fear being judged by their superiors or peers.
3.2.4 How is “effort expectancy” a factor in predicting teachers’ beliefs about OPD?
Effort expectancy refers to the simplicity of using a system, in our case online professional development programmes. This construct directly influences teachers’ BI to use OPD. Thus, the lesser the complexity of the system, the higher will be teachers’ behavioural intention to use OPD. The instructions need to be able to be easily understood and readily available. The link to the resources must be able to be accessed through a single click on the screen to ensure the ease of use. Therefore, teachers’ intention to use OPD will increase.
67