Factors Affecting University Lecturers’ Adoption of Learning Management System (LMS) in Kurdistan Region of Iraq: A Conceptual Framework
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/tb2ncy79Keywords:
Lecturer’s adoption; Learning Management system; DeLone& McLean IS Success Model; Technology Accepting Model; Kurdistan Region of Iraq.Abstract
Purpose of the study: This paper presents a conceptual framework underlying research on factors affecting LMS adoption in the Kurdistan Region universities. Although LMS has been widely adopted in universities worldwide, unfortunately, the adoption is still low in the Kurdistan Region universities. Methodology: This paper reviewed relevant literature related to the subject to determine the most significant factors influencing the LMS adoption. More specifically, four factors (organizational, social, individual, andtechnological) were) selected that might be valid for the study context. This study usedthe Technologyy Accepting Model as the primary theory with the combination of the IS Success Model. Main Findings: This conceptual paper provides insightsintof variables related to factors affecting LMS adoption. The mainfindingsg of the study show that organizational factors (facilitating condition, top management support, and top management policy), socialfactorsr (only subjective norm), individual factors (resistance to change andself-efficiency),) and technological factors (service quality and system quality) might havea significantt link withthe preservatione of use,the preservatione ofusefulness,s andthe actuall use ofa learningg management system. Another finding of this study predicted that the actual use of LMS might significantly affect the net benefit (improving lecturers' and universities' performance). Applications of this study: This study proposed a conceptual research framework expected to guide KRI university leaders in understanding the most significant factors that must be addressed to adopt LMS among lecturers. Furthermore, understanding those factors might be useful for decisionmakers in the Ministry of Higher Education in KRI to achievethe Ministry'ss pedagogical strategy, modifying from lecturer-centered to student-centered pedagogy. Novelty/Originality of this study: No studyhas beens done before on the lecturer's influenceonn LMS adoption in higher education in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq.
Downloads
References
[1] Abdallah, N. A., Ahlan, A. R., & Abdullah, O. A. (2019). The Role of Quality Factors on Learning Management Systems Adoption from
Instructors’ Perspectives. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 7(2), 133.
[2] Abdallah, S. (2010). ICT Acceptance, Investment and Organization: Cultural Practices and Values in the Arab World: Cultural Practices
and Values in the Arab World: IGI Global.
[3] Abdullah, F., & Ward, R. (2016). Developing a General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-Learning (GETAMEL) by
analysing commonly used external factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 238-256.
[4] Ahmed, A.-A., Patrick, P., &Karsten, L. (2016). Barriers and Opportunities of E-Learning Implementation in Iraq: A Case of Public
Universities. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(5). DOI:10.19173/irrodl.v17i5.2501
[5] Al Imarah, A., Zwain, A., & Al-Hakim, L. (2013). The adoption of e-government services in the Iraqi Higher Education Context: An
application of the UTAUT model in the University of Kufa. Journal of Information Engineering and Applications, 3(10), 77-84.
[6] Al Musawi, A. S. (2018). Oman. In A. S. Weber & S. Hamlaoui (Eds.), E-Learning in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region
(pp. 285-308). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
[7] Al-alak, B. A., &Alnawas, I. A. (2011). Measuring the acceptance and adoption of e-learning by academic staff. Knowledge Management
& E-Learning: An International Journal, 3(2), 201-221.
[8] Al-Azawei, A. (2019). What Drives Successful Social Media in Education and E-learning? A Comparative Study on facebook and Moodle.
Journal of Information Technology Education, 18.
[9] Al-Busaidi, K. A., & Al-Shihi, H. (2010). Instructors' acceptance of learning management systems: A theoretical framework.
Communications of the IBIMA, 2010(2010), 1-10.
[10] Alghamdi, S. R., &Bayaga, A. (2016). Use and attitude towards Learning Management Systems (LMS) in Saudi Arabian universities.
Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(9).
[11] Alharbi, S., & Drew, S. (2014). Using the technology acceptance model in understanding academics’ behavioural intention to use learning
management systems. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 5(1), 143-155.
[12] Ali, S. O. (2012). Quality assurance and effectiveness in Kurdistan higher education: The reform process. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology.
[13] Alkhateeb, F., AlMaghayreh, E., Aljawarneh, S., Muhsin, Z., &Nsour, A. (2010). E-learning tools and technologies in education: A
perspective. E-learning.
[14] Al-Sharhan, S. (2018). Kuwait. In A. S. Weber & S. Hamlaoui (Eds.), E-Learning in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region
(pp. 193-224). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
[15] Althobaiti, M. M., & Mayhew, P. (2015). Assessing the usability of learning management system: user experience study. Paper presented
at the Second International Conference on e-Learning, e-Education, and Online Training.
[16] Badu-Nyarko, S. K. (2006). Faculty attitudes towards distance education: A review of the literature. International Journal of Instructional
Technology and Distance Learning, 3(5), 59-71.
[17] Bovey, W. H., &Hede, A. (2001). Resistance to organisational change: the role of defence mechanisms. Journal of managerial psychology,
16(7), 534-548.
[18] Buabeng-Andoh, C. (2012). Factors influencing teachersâ adoption and integration of information and communication technology into
teaching: A review of the literature. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 8(1).
[19] Carvalho, A., Areal, N., & Silva, J. (2011). Students' perceptions of Blackboard and Moodle in a Portuguese university. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 42(5), 824-841.
[20] Chaubey, A., & Bhattacharya, B. (2015). Learning management system in Higher education. IJSTE-International Journal of Science
Technology & Engineering, 2(3).
[21] Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS quarterly, 189-211.
[22] Coskuncay, F. (2013). A model for instructors' adoption of learning management systems: Empirical validation in higher education
context. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 12(2), 13-25.
[23] Dahlstrom, E., Brooks, D. C., &Bichsel, J. (2014). The current ecosystem of learning management systems in higher education: Student,
faculty, and IT perspectives. In: Research report. Louisville, CO: ECAR, September 2014.
[24] Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340
25] DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (1992). Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information systems
research, 3(1), 60-95.
[26] DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2002, 10-10 Jan. 2002). Information systems success revisited. Paper presented at the Proceedings of
the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
[27] Delone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: a ten-year update. Journal of
management information systems, 19(4), 9-30.
[28] Donovan, T., Bates, T., Seaman, J., Mayer, D., Martel, É., Paul, R., . . . Poulin, R. (2019). Tracking Online and Distance Education in
Canadian Universities and Colleges: 2018.
[29] Dougiamas, M., & Taylor, P. (2003). Moodle: Using Learning Communities to Create an Open Source Course Management System. Paper
presented at the EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2003, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/13739
[30] Dube, S., & Scott, E. (2014). An empirical study on the use of the Sakai Learning Management System (LMS): Case of NUST, Zimbabwe.
Paper presented at the Proceedings of the e-skills for Knowledge Production and Innovation Conference.
[31] Fadhil, A., & Al-Ameen, Z. (2016). E-Learning at Private Universities in Kurdistan Region: A Comparative Field Study. International
Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 8(9), 35-42.
[32] Granić, A., &Marangunić, N. (2019). Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review. British Journal
of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2572-2593.
[33] Gurbaxani, V., Kraemer, K. L., King, J. L., Jarman, S., Dedrick, J., Raman, K. S., & Yap, C. S. (1990). Government as the driving force
toward the information society: National computer policy in Singapore. The Information Society, 7(2), 155-185.
DOI:10.1080/01972243.1990.9960092
[34] Hussein, H. B. (2011). Attitudes of Saudi universities faculty members towards using learning management system (JUSUR). Turkish
Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 10(2), 43-53.
[35] Igbaria, M., Guimaraes, T., & Davis, G. B. (1995). Testing the determinants of microcomputer usage via a structural equation model.
Journal of management information systems, 11(4), 87-114.
[36] Imran, I. I., Elameer, A. S., & Al-Hamdani, R. (2017). Design and Development of a MOOC for Academic Institution in Iraq. Paper
presented at the 1 st International Conference on Information Technology (ICoIT'17).
[37] Islam, A. K. M. N. (2013). Investigating e-learning system usage outcomes in the university context. Computers & Education, 69, 387-
399. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.037
[38] Kabassi, K., Dragonas, I., Ntouzevits, A., Pomonis, T., Papastathopoulos, G., &Vozaitis, Y. (2016). Evaluating a learning management
system for blended learning in Greek higher education. SpringerPlus, 5(1), 101.
[39] Kasim, N. N. M., & Khalid, F. (2016). Choosing the right learning management system (LMS) for the higher education institution context:
a systematic review. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 11(06), 55-61.
[40] Kim, M.-R. (2008). Factors influencing the acceptance of e-learning courses for mainstream faculty in higher institutions. International
Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 5(2), 29-44.
[41] Lawrence, J. E., & Tar, U. A. (2018). Factors that influence teachers’ adoption and integration of ICT in teaching/learning process.
Educational Media International, 55(1), 79-105. DOI:10.1080/09523987.2018.1439712
[42] Li, Y., Wang, Q., & Lei, J. (2019). Modeling Chinese Teachers' Attitudes Toward Using Technology for Teaching with a SEM Approach.
Computers in the Schools, 36(2), 122-141.
[43] Martín-Blas, T., & Serrano-Fernández, A. (2009). The role of new technologies in the learning process: Moodle as a teaching tool in
Physics. Computers & Education, 52(1), 35-44.
[44] Mazlan, A., &Bolong, J. (2017). The Role of the Learning Management System Usage and Impact of the Changes to the Social Interaction
Anxiety: A Tentative Model.
[45] Mokhtar, S. A., Katan, H., &Hidayat-ur-Rehman, I. (2018). Instructors’ Behavioural Intention to Use Learning Management System: An
Integrated TAM Perspective. TEM Journal, 7(3), 513.
[46] Motaghian, H., Hassanzadeh, A., &Moghadam, D. K. (2013). Factors affecting university instructors' adoption of web-based learning
systems: Case study of Iran. Computers & Education, 61, 158-167.
[47] Motschnig-Pitrik, R., &Holzinger, A. (2002). Student-centered teaching meets new media: Concept and case study. Educational
Technology & Society, 5(4), 160-172.
[48] Nasser, R., &Cherif, M. (2011). Factors that impact student usage of the learning Management System in Gatari Schools. The International
Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 12(6).
[49] Ngai, E. W., Poon, J., & Chan, Y. H. (2007). Empirical examination of the adoption of WebCT using TAM. Computers & Education,
48(2), 250-267.
[50] Park, S. Y. (2009). An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding university students' behavioral intention to use elearning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 150-162.
[51] Porter, C. E., &Donthu, N. (2006). Using the technology acceptance model to explain how attitudes determine Internet usage: The role of
perceived access barriers and demographics. Journal of business research, 59(9), 999-1007.
[52] Radif, M. (2016). A learning management system adoption framework for higher education: the case of Iraq.
[53] Rosen, L. D., & Weil, M. M. (1995). Computer availability, computer experience and technophobia among public school teachers.
Computers in Human Behavior, 11(1), 9-31.
[54] Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., &Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling
approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13-35.
[55] Siyam, N. (2019). Factors impacting special education teachers’ acceptance and actual use of technology. Education and Information
Technologies, 24(3), 2035-2057. DOI:10.1007/s10639-018-09859-y
[56] Srichanyachon, N. (2014). EFL Learners' Perceptions of Using LMS. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 13(4),
30-35.
[57] Ssekakubo, G., Suleman, H., & Marsden, G. (2011). Issues of adoption: have e-learning management systems fulfilled their potential in
developing countries? Paper presented at the Proceedings of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information
Technologists conference on knowledge, innovation and leadership in a diverse, multidisciplinary environment.
[58] Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52(2), 302-312.
[59] Trinidad, J. E. (2019). Understanding student-centred learning in higher education: students’ and teachers’ perceptions, challenges, and
cognitive gaps. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 1-11. DOI:10.1080/0309877X.2019.1636214
[60] Venkatesh, V., &Bala, H. (2008). Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2),
273-315. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
[61] Wang, W.-T., & Wang, C.-C. (2009). An empirical study of instructor adoption of web-based learning systems. Computers & Education,
53(3), 761-774.
[62] Weber, A. S. (2018). Qatar. In A. S. Weber & S. Hamlaoui (Eds.), E-Learning in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region (pp.
333-354). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
[63] Weber, A. S. (2018). Saudi Arabia. In A. S. Weber & S. Hamlaoui (Eds.), E-Learning in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA)
Region (pp. 355-381). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
[64] Weber, A. S., &Hamlaoui, S. (2018). E-Learning in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region: Springer International Publishing.
[65] Welsh, E. T., Wanberg, C. R., Brown, K. G., & Simmering, M. J. (2003). E‐learning: emerging uses, empirical results and future
directions. International Journal of Training and Development, 7(4), 245-258.
[66] Wu, J.-H., Chen, Y.-C., & Lin, L.-M. (2007). Empirical evaluation of the revised end user computing acceptance model. Computers in
Human Behavior, 23(1), 162-174.
[67] Zain, M., Rose, R. C., Abdullah, I., &Masrom, M. (2005). The relationship between information technology acceptance and organizational
agility in Malaysia. Information & Management, 42(6), 829-839.
[68] Zwain, A. A. A. (2019). Technological innovativeness and information quality as neoteric predictors of users’ acceptance of learning
management system: An expansion of UTAUT2. Interactive Technology and Smart Education.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
