You are here:

Applying a Modified Technology Acceptance Model to Qualitatively Analyse the Factors Affecting E-Portfolio Implementation for Student Teachers’ in Field Experience Placements
PROCEEDINGS

, , , The Hong Kong Institute of Education, China

Proceedings of the Informing Science and Information Technology Education Conference, ISSN 1535-0703 Publisher: Informing Science Institute

Full Text

Abstract

The study involved student teachers enrolled in the Bachelor of Education English Language Programme at the Hong Kong Institute of Education. Students (N= 77) participated in a pilot study by electronically submitting their field experience portfolios in their third and fourth year of study. Student teachers were invited through e-mailsto participate in focus group interviews. The purpose of this interview was to examine the merits and challenges of digitising the existing FE paper-based portfolio, using a digital portfolio platform, and to plan for future development using Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as the research framework. All participants were required to create e-portfoliosto showcase their achievements, the effects of actual system used led to long-term behavioural intention to use, diverging from the TAM’s original model, which predicted actual system use. Student teachers either participated in a semi-structured interview (n = 7) or replied via e-mails(n = 2). The results indicated that attitude towards usage (ATU) evidenced a direct relationship to behavioural intention to use. Furthermore, for those who had mixed ATU, perceived usage was the determining factor. The findings provide insightful information not only for the next implementation phase of an e-portfolio, but also for those considering implementing e-portfolios.

Citation

Ng, E.M.W., Shroff, R. & Lim, C. (2013). Applying a Modified Technology Acceptance Model to Qualitatively Analyse the Factors Affecting E-Portfolio Implementation for Student Teachers’ in Field Experience Placements. In E. Cohen & E. Boyd (Eds.), Proceedings of Proceedings of the Informing Science and Information Technology Education Conference 2013 (pp. 355-365). Informing Science Institute. Retrieved August 6, 2024 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Abrami, P.C., & Barret, H. (2005). Directions for research and development on electronic portfolios. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 31(3).
  2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2000). Attitudes and the attitude-behavior relation: Reasoned and automatic processes. In W. Stroebe &. M. Hewstone. (Eds.), European review of social psychology (pp. 1-33).
  3. Bala, S.S, Mansor, W.F.A.W., Stapa, M., & Zhkaria, M.H. (2012) Digital Portfolio and Professional Development of Language Teachers, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 66, 176 – 186.
  4. Chau, J., & Cheng, G. (2010). Towards understanding the potential of e-portfolios for independent learning: A qualitative study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(7), 932-950.
  5. Chuang, H.H. (2010). Weblog-based electronic portfolios for student teachers. Education tech research development, 58, 211-227.
  6. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
  7. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982-1003.
  8. Evans, M.A., & Powell, A. (2007). Conceptual and practical issues related to the design for and sustainability of communities of practice: The case of e-portfolio use in preservice teacher training. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 16(2), 199-214.
  9. Evans, M.A., & Schwen, T.M. (2006). Chasing a fault across ship and shore: Explaining knolwedge and work in context. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 19(2), 211-229.
  10. Gaide, S. (2006). EPortfolio: Supercharge performance-based student assessment. Distance Education Report, 10(2), 14-16.
  11. Gao, Y. (2005). Applying the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to educational hypermedia: A field study. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 14(3), 237-247.
  12. Goldsby, D.S., & Fazal, M.B. (2000). Technology’s answer to portfolios for teachers. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 36(3), 121-123.
  13. Hallam, G., & Creagh, T. (2010). EPortfolio use by university students in Australia: A review of the Australian ePortfolio Project. Higher Education Research& Development, 29(2), 179-293.
  14. Herner-Patnode, L., & Lee, H.-J. (2009). A capstone experience for preservice teachers: Building a webbased portfolio. Educational Technology and Society, 12(1), 101-110.
  15. Hussein, N.H.N. (2009). Students perspectives on the engagement of electronic portfolio as a tool in classroom instruction. Journal of Human Capital Development, 2(1), 53-64.
  16. Modified Technology Acceptance ModelJafari, A. (2004). The “sticky” eportfolio system. Tackling challenges& Identifying attributes. EDUCAUSE Review, 39(4), 38-49.
  17. Makinster, J.G., Barab, S., Harwood, W., & Anderson, H.O. (2006). The effect of social context on reflective practice of preservice science teachers: Incorporating a web-supported community of teachers. The Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 543-579.
  18. McKinnon, K., & Igonor, A. (2008). Explaining elearning perceptions using the Technology Acceptance Model and the Theory of Planned Behavior. Proceedings of the World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2008. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  19. Nov, O., & Ye, C. (2008). Users’ personality and perceived ease of use of digital libraries: The case for resistance to change. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(5), 845-851.
  20. Orland-Barak, L. (2005). Portfolios as evidence of reflective practice: What remains ‘untold’. Educational Research, 47(1), 25-44.
  21. Park, N. (2009). User acceptance of e-learning in higher education: An application of the Technology Acceptance Model. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the International Communication Association, New York.
  22. Shepherd, C., & Bolliger, D.U. (2011). The effects of electronic portfolio tools on online students’ perceived support and cognitive load. Internet and Higher Education, 14, 142-149.
  23. Shepherd, C., & Hannafin, M. (2011). Supporting preservice teacher inquiry with electronic portfolios. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19(2), 189-207.
  24. Shroff, R.H., Deneen, C., & Ng, E.M.W. (2011). An analysis of the technology acceptance model in examining students’ behavioral intention to use an electronic portfolio system. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(4), 600-618.
  25. Strudler, N., & Wetzel, K. (2008). Costs and benefits of electronic portfolios in teacher education: Faculty perspectives. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24(4), 135-141.
  26. Sugar, W., Crawley, F., & Fine, B. (2004). Examining teachers’ decisions to adopt new technology. Educational Technology and Society, 7(4), 201-213.
  27. Sung, Y.-T., Chang, K.-E, Yu, W.-C, Chang, T.-H (2008). Supporting teachers' reflection and learning through structured digital teaching portfolios. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 375-385.
  28. Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers& Education, 52(2), 302-312.
  29. Wright, V.H., Stallworth, B.J., & Ray, B. (2002). Challenges of electronic portfolios: Student perceptions and experiences. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(1), 49-61.
  30. Zhang, S.X., Olfman, L., & Ractham, P. (2007). Designing eportfolio 2.0: Integrating and coordinating web 2.0 services with eportfolio systems for enhancing users’ learning. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18, 203-214.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Links