Campus-Wide Information Systems

Emerald Article: Investigating students' perceptions on laptop initiative in higher education: An extension of the technology acceptance model Susan Elwood, Chuleeporn Changchit, Robert Cutshall

Article information:
To cite this document: Susan Elwood, Chuleeporn Changchit, Robert Cutshall, (2006),"Investigating students' perceptions on laptop initiative in higher education: An extension of the technology acceptance model", Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 23 Iss: 5 pp. 336 - 349 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10650740610714099 Downloaded on: 13-01-2013 References: This document contains references to 24 other documents Citations: This document has been cited by 6 other documents To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com This document has been downloaded 1507 times since 2006. *

Users who downloaded this Article also downloaded: *

Susan Elwood, Chuleeporn Changchit, Robert Cutshall, (2006),"Investigating students' perceptions on laptop initiative in higher education: An extension of the technology acceptance model", Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 23 Iss: 5 pp. 336 - 349 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10650740610714099 Susan Elwood, Chuleeporn Changchit, Robert Cutshall, (2006),"Investigating students' perceptions on laptop initiative in higher education: An extension of the technology acceptance model", Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 23 Iss: 5 pp. 336 - 349 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10650740610714099 Susan Elwood, Chuleeporn Changchit, Robert Cutshall, (2006),"Investigating students' perceptions on laptop initiative in higher education: An extension of the technology acceptance model", Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 23 Iss: 5 pp. 336 - 349 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10650740610714099

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by MAJLIS AMANAH RAKYAT For Authors: If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service. Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1065-0741.htm

CWIS 23,5

Investigating students perceptions on laptop initiative in higher education

An extension of the technology acceptance model
Susan Elwood
College of Education, Texas A&M University Corpus Christi, Texas, USA, and

336

Chuleeporn Changchit and Robert Cutshall

College of Business, Texas A&M University Corpus Christi, Texas, USA
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to examine students perceptions and their acceptance towards implementing a laptop program. Design/methodology/approach Extensive research has been carried out on the technology acceptance model (TAM) to better understand the behavioral intention of individuals to accept and use technology. Therefore, the TAM was adopted as the theoretical framework. Data analysis consisted of factor analysis according to the TAM models two primary constructs, followed by T-tests to determine the impact of the discovered factors on participants attitudes on a laptop initiative. Findings This study analyzes survey questions related to the two factors in the TAM model, as well as the discovery of a third factor, perceived change. By understanding what factors are of main concern to students, a laptop program can be made more useful to students and universities. Research limitations/implications This research was limited to one particular university. Suggestions for further research are to adapt and conduct the suggested survey tool in other university settings, according to the constructs of the TAM model as described in this paper. Practical implications The laptop initiative questionnaire contains questions that focus on all three TAM model factors. This provides a comprehensive base of questions for those needing to conduct similar lines of research within their universities. Originality/value This paper provides a tested survey based upon the widely accepted technology acceptance model with an added factor pertinent to the exploration of technology acceptance within the university environment. Keywords Laptops, Portable computers, Higher education, United States of America Paper type Research paper

Campus-Wide Information Systems Vol. 23 No. 5, 2006 pp. 336-349 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1065-0741 DOI 10.1108/10650740610714099

1. Introduction At an increasing number of universities, laptop computers have become a requirement for incoming students in preparation for their career success. Employers value extensive experience with information technology and are expecting their higher education graduates to be computer literate (Rola and Building, 2002; Tomek and Muldner, 1999). Previous researchers have shown that laptop computers in the classroom can lead to positive educational outcomes (Finn and Inman, 2004; Fouts and Stuen, 1997; Gottfried and McFeely, 1998; Varvel and Thurston, 2002).

Students use of laptop computers is becoming more prevalent in todays universities. This more ubiquitous use of technology has caused several universities to uncover and manage new perceptual issues in addition to some of the more familiar issues from the era of computers found only in university labs. Higher education laptop initiatives are still in the early stages of development. Several universities are still reluctant to implement such initiatives (Finn and Inman, 2004). To successfully implement the laptop initiative, it is essential that university students, as a whole, willingly support such a program. Dening the acceptance factors necessary to successfully implement a laptop initiative becomes a critical need towards the success of such a program. 2. Background overview The need for information technology access on a daily basis continues to grow. Some of the more apparent needs include portability, digital unity, and support. The light-weight, portable laptop enables users to work anywhere and anytime, thus having increased in popularity among personal computer users. Digital unity may be seen as a requirement in order to successfully implement a laptop program (Finn and Inman, 2004). A prior study suggested that it was important for students to have the same technology base, such as hardware and software upon which to build their computer skills. Support services for students and faculty should facilitate teaching, learning, and education-related administrative tasks (Lehner et al., 2003). A decision to require students to own a laptop is not unusual among higher education institutions. Universities are initiating programs in which students purchase laptop computers while universities offer computing and networking facilities. Such programs can include web-based resources, access to library catalogs, eld-based portable computing and graduate degree programs. Within a short amount of time, higher education has reached a ubiquitous electronic presence. Positive effects of supporting such ubiquitous electronic environments are numerous. Wake Forest University has had a laptop program in place since 1997. It reports that providing 100 percent computer access has led to better communication and collaboration, which in turn has enhanced teaching and learning (Olsen, 2001). Faculty and students at Acadia University are using laptops and the Internet in the classroom to support active learning and interdisciplinary projects in the social sciences (Watters et al., 1998). The laptop initiative has given students a better education and made them more competent in using technology. Students perceptual base regarding a laptop initiative are related to several key issues: . academic and social use of laptops; . e-mail and instant-messaging; . faculty utilization; . web uses; . comparisons with desktops; . cost; . library use; . problems;

Investigating students perceptions 337

CWIS 23,5

. . . . .

338

family utilization; service and help; convenience; network access; worry; and hardware and software (Demb et al., 2004).

Prior studies reported that in order for technology in education to effect the most positive change, educators themselves must be open to such changes. The more an educator remains receptive to, is primed for, and is capable of adapting to change, the greater the impact of the technology (Rieber and Welliver, 1989). Another research studied 94 classrooms from four states in different geographic regions of the country (Baylor and Ritchie, 2002). Their ndings included several predictions for the success of laptop programs that stemmed from educators openness to change. Such predictions included: . educators technological competency; . integration of technology in their curriculum; . technology impact on content acquisition; and . technology impact on higher-order-thinking skills. Another leading factor related to successful technology integration was the constructivist use of technology (Baylor and Ritchie, 2002). Educator morale and technology impact on higher-order thinking skills were predicted by the constructivist use of technology. Since students perceptions of the usefulness of technology are inuenced by the instructional methods employed by their professors, it is important that faculty implement technology integrated strategies in their classes. Two trends exist in regards to educators identifying incentives for integrating computers in their teaching: (1) student accomplishment, rather than educator external rewards; and (2) students being able to use computers as a tool for their own purposes. Barriers towards integrating technological advances within educators teaching exist (Baylor and Ritchie, 2002). The most noted barriers were: . too few computers and peripheral equipment; . not enough time to prepare computer-based lessons; and . challenges with scheduling enough computer time for different teachers classes. The barriers of limited hardware and scheduling enough computer time for different teachers classes would be eliminated with a laptop initiative. This study centers on the needs and perceptions of the students regarding a laptop initiative. It is important for a university to understand what perceived factors can inuence students collective decisions to support or reject a laptop program before implementing such a program. Such an understanding leads to a more successful program to students and administrators within universities.

3. Theoretical framework A review of prior studies suggested that the technology acceptance model (TAM) was widely used to study the users acceptance of the new technology. The TAM has received great respect in the information technology and information systems literature (Davis, 1989; Davis et al., 1989). The model was proposed in 1986 to address the question why users accept or reject information technology. The key purpose of TAM is to trace the impact of external variables on internal beliefs, attitudes, and intentions. The TAM suggests that two factors perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness are the two main factors in explaining system use. Perceived usefulness is dened as the prospective users subjective probability that using a specic application system will increase his or her job performance within an organizational context (Davis et al., 1989). This factor has a signicant effect on usage intention (Agarwal and Prasad, 1999; Davis et al., 1989; Venkatesh, 2000; Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). Perceived ease of use is dened as the degree to which the prospective user expects the target system to be free of effort (Davis et al., 1989). This factor plays a crucial role in understanding individual response to information technology (Agarwal and Karahanna, 2000; Chau, 2001; Hong et al., 2001). Research over the past decade provides evidence of the signicant effect perceived ease of use has on usage intention (Agarwal and Prasad, 1999; Venkatesh, 2000; Venkatesh and Davis, 2000). The TAM has several strengths, including its specic focus on information system use, its theory base of social psychology, as well as the validity and reliability of its instruments. Overall, the TAM has received wide spread support based on a meta-analysis of 22 articles. The model is successful in predicting about 40 per cent of a systems use (Legris et al., 2004). In order to investigate students perceptions on the laptop initiative, this study utilizes the TAM as the theoretical framework. The initial research model is shown in Figure 1. 4. Methodology A direct survey was used to collect the data for this study. The survey questions were compiled from previous study questions pertaining to information technology innovation as well as suggestions from researchers and students (Demb et al., 2004; Luarn and Lin, 2004; Moore and Benbasat, 1991). These questions were designed to gather data on students perceptions toward the laptop initiative, as well as their demographics. To validate the clarity of these questions, three professors and three students were asked to read through the survey questions. Revisions to the survey were made based on the feedback received (see Appendix). A total of 68 items were used as ve-point Likert scaled questions with end points rating from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Survey items Q1 to Q28 were used

Investigating students perceptions 339

Figure 1. Initial research model

CWIS 23,5

to collect demographic data. Survey items Q29 to Q67 measured students perceptions on the laptop computer initiative. Survey item Q68 measured students willingness to support a laptop initiative. 4.1 Data collection To test the research model, surveys were distributed to 272 undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in a mid-sized four-year university. The participants were given a 68-item survey and allowed class time to complete the survey. All participants were informed that participation in the study was voluntary and that all individual responses would be kept anonymous. The students were asked to rate each of the survey items on a Likert-scale from 1 to 5 with 1 being strongly disagree and 5 being strongly agree. A total of 269 surveys were returned with virtually all of the questions answered. Table I summarizes the demographic characteristics of the students. Approximately 84 percent of the students owned a desktop computer and around 40 percent owned a laptop computer. Around 47 percent were rst generation college students. Table II summarizes the students use of computer and their experiences with computers. On a seven-point scale ranging from very poor to excellent, students were asked to rate their knowledge about computers. Of the students 83 percent rated their

340

n Age (in years): Under 18 18-21 22-25 26-29 30-33 34-37 Over 37 Gender: Female Male Ethnicity: African American Asian Caucasian Hispanic Native American First generation college student: Yes No Table I. Demographic characteristics Own a computer: Desktop Laptop 2 105 83 29 14 12 24 166 102 17 15 133 98 5 127 139 227 109

% (0.7) (39) (30.9) (10.8) (5.2) (4.4) (8.9) (61.7) (37.9) (6.3) (5.6) (49.4) (36.4) (1.9) (47.2) (51.7) (84.4) (40.5)

n Rate your computer knowledge 1(very poor) 5 2 10 3 31 4 69 5 82 6 50 7 (excellent) 22 How long have you been using the internet? Never 1 , 1 year 0 1-2 years 15 . 2 years 253 How often do you use the internet per week? Never 1 Once 11 2-3 times 19 . 3 times 236 How often did you use a desktop computer in high school per week? Never 58 Once 34 2-3 times 62 . 3 times 115 How often did you use a laptop computer in high school per week? Never 206 Once 25 2-3 times 17 . 3 times 21 How often do you use a desktop computer for classroom assignments per week? Never 19 Once 26 2-3 times 68 . 3 times 156 How often do you use a laptop computer for classroom assignments per week? Never 145 Once 20 2-3 times 40 . 3 times 64 How often do you use a desktop computer for leisure per week? Never 28 Once 31 2-3 times 49 . 3 times 161 How often do you use a laptop computer for leisure per week? Never 164 Once 22 2-3 times 23 . 3 times 60 Does your current work require the use of a desktop computer? Yes 138 No 123 Does your current work require the use of a laptop computer? Yes 51 No 211

% (1.9) (3.7) (11.5) (25.6) (30.5) (18.6) (8.2) (0.4) (0) (5.6) (94) (0.4) (4.1) (7.1) (87.7) (21.6) (12.6) (23) (42.8) (76.6) (9.3) (6.3) (7.8) (7.1) (9.7) (25.3) (58) (53.9) (7.4) (14.9) (23.8) (10.4) (11.5) (18.2) (59.9) (61) (8.2) (8.6) (22.3) (51.3) (45.7) (19) (78.4)

Investigating students perceptions 341

Table II. Computer usage and experience

CWIS 23,5

knowledge about computers as average to excellent. As shown in Table II, a majority of students are using computers for classroom assignments in their college education. 4.2 Data analysis The research data showed a reliability coefcient (Cronbachs alpha) of 0.971, suggesting reliability of the data. A second measure of internal consistency, the odd-even reliability test, resulted in a similar score of 0.981. It should be noted that this high level of reliability relates to the data collected, not the instrument itself. Factor analysis was used to verify the groupings (factors) of the items in the instrument against the two constructs initially presented in the research model which are: (1) perceived usefulness; and (2) perceived ease of use. In addition, the factor analysis was used to assess the construct validity of the initial research model and to uncover any additional factors inuencing students perceptions of the laptop initiative. Principal components analysis was used as the extraction method with varimax rotation. Four factors emerged with eigenvalues greater than one. The factor matrix is presented in Table III. Factor loadings over 0.5 on one factor and less than 0.5 on all other factors produce a clean loading (Hair et al., 1995). As a result of the factor analysis, four survey items (Q37 and Q42-Q44) were discarded due to cross loadings between factors or no apparent loading. The remaining items loaded cleanly onto the two research constructs and identied the presence of two additional constructs as follows: (1) Perceived usefulness survey items Q29-Q36, Q38-Q41, and Q45 loaded onto one factor. Previous research (e.g. Davis, 1989) conrmed this factor as perceived usefulness. (2) Perceived requirements survey items Q46-Q54 loaded onto a unidimensional factor. An examination of these questions reveals students concerns about the availability of resources necessary to support laptop use (e.g., the power outlets, the wireless network). This factor is, therefore, referred to as the perceived requirements. (3) Perceived ease of use survey items Q55-Q61 loaded onto the dimension for perceived ease of use. Factor analysis extracted a unidimensional measure for perceived ease of use. This construct is consistent with the TAM research (Davis, 1989). (4) Perceived change further investigation revealed the presence of a second new factor. Items Q62-Q67 successfully loaded onto a single factor. Factor analysis extracted a unidimensional measure for perceived change. An examination of these questions reveals students awareness of the changes that will occur with the implementation of laptop initiatives such as more in-class electronic assignments. This factor is, therefore, referred to as the perceived change. Factor analysis conrmed not only the presence of the original TAM factors of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use, but it also revealed the presence of two additional factors:

342

Factors Items Q29 Q30 Q31 Q32 Q33 Q34 Q35 Q36 Q38 Q39 Q40 Q41 Q45 Q46 Q47 Q48 Q49 Q50 Q51 Q52 Q53 Q54 Q55 Q56 Q57 Q58 Q59 Q60 Q61 Q62 Q63 Q64 Q65 Q66 Q67 1 0.761 0.822 0.753 0.741 0.693 0.770 0.647 0.774 0.561 0.748 0.643 0.733 0.667 0.754 0.757 0.720 0.809 0.753 0.758 0.797 0.774 0.639 0.691 0.801 0.715 0.647 0.745 0.738 0.734 0.632 0.725 0.699 0.757 0.776 0.712 2 3 4

Investigating students perceptions 343

Table III. Factor analysis results

(1) perceived requirements; and (2) perceived change. T-tests were conducted to determine the impact of the four factors on participants attitudes on a laptop initiative. The responses from participants were divided into two groups, those who favored the laptop initiative (support group) and those who did not support the initiative (reject group). Then t-tests were performed to determine whether differences existed between the groups for each of the factors in the revised research model: perceived usefulness, perceived requirements, perceived ease of use, and perceived change.

CWIS 23,5

344

Table IV shows the mean of the responses from the two groups and the t-test results. The results pointed out that there are signicant differences between the two groups on three of the four factors in the research model. For the factor perceived usefulness, a signicant difference was found between the groups at the p 0:01 level. The result suggests that the higher the perceived usefulness of a laptop program, the more likely the program would be accepted. The t-test indicated that there was no signicant difference between the two groups on the factor perceived requirements. This suggests that the participants perceptions about the requirements needed to support the use of the laptop do not impact their attitudes about a laptop program. For the factor perceived ease of use, the t-test showed that there was a signicant difference between the groups at the p 0:01 level. This suggests that the higher the perceived ease of use of a laptop program, the more likely the program would be accepted. The t-test also conrmed a signicant difference, at the p 0:01 level, between the two groups on the factor perceived change. The result suggests that the higher the perceived change of a laptop program, the more likely the program would be accepted. The t-test results reveal that three factors have the impact on participants attitudes on a laptop initiative. The initial research model was therefore revised to reect these ndings. The resultant model is shown in Figure 2. 5. Discussion Extensive research has been carried out on the TAM to better understand the behavioral intention of individuals to accept and use technology. The TAMs primary factors are perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. The results in this study revealed that the TAM may miss other important factors in measuring students
Mean Factors Perceived Perceived Perceived Perceived usefulness requirements ease of use change Support group 4.14 4.34 4.15 4.00 Reject group 3.64 4.22 3.75 3.22 t-value 1.982 1.985 1.983 1.980 p-value 0.000 * 0.343 0.002 * 0.000 *

Table IV. Factors inuencing the attitudes on the laptop initiative

Note: * Signicant at the p , 0.01 level

Figure 2. Resultant research model

acceptance of a laptop initiative. In addition to the two factors presented in the TAM, perceived change was discovered as a new TAM factor. This nding points out that although students may believe that a laptop computer is useful and easy to use, they are also aware of the changes that will occur with the implementation of laptop initiative. Their perceptions of changes, such as I believe that if all students have laptops, professor will create active learning environments, seem to encourage them to accept the laptop program. Based on the results of this study, the new factor, perceived change, suggests that universities educate students on the changes accompanying the implementation of a laptop program. The more knowledge the students have about positive changes a laptop program can lead to, the greater chance they will support such a program. 6. Conclusion and implications for future research The initiative for the use of laptop computers in higher education may be viewed as useful and even easy to use, due to the increasing use of technology in primary and secondary education. However, it should be noted that other considerations go into the decision process. This initial study is exploratory in nature and provides some interesting ndings that warrant additional research. The results reveal the existence of two new factors, perceived requirements and perceived change, in addition to the two factors proposed by the TAM. However, only one of these two factors, perceived change, provides a signicant impact on students acceptance of a laptop initiative. The three factors (perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and perceived change) can play a major role in determining the acceptance of a laptop initiative. These results appear to be contributing factors to technology acceptance and warrant further investigation. Future research should include faculty, staff, and administrators before any generalizations can be made.
References Agarwal, R. and Karahanna, E. (2000), Time ies when youre having fun: cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 665-94. Agarwal, R. and Prasad, J. (1999), Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies?, Decision Sciences, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 361-91. Baylor, A.L. and Ritchie, D. (2002), What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and perceived student learning in technology-using classrooms?, Computers and Education, Vol. 39, pp. 395-414. Chau, P.Y.K. and Hu, P.J.H. (2001), Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: a model comparison approach, Decision Sciences, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 699-719. Davis, F.D. (1989), Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 318-39. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1989), User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models, Management Science, Vol. 35 No. 8, pp. 982-1003. Demb, A., Erickson, D. and Hawkins-Wilding, S. (2004), The laptop alternative: student reactions and strategic implications, Computers and Education, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 383-401. Finn, S. and Inman, J. (2004), Digital unity and digital divide: surveying alumni to study effects of a campus laptop initiative, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 297-317.

Investigating students perceptions 345

CWIS 23,5

346

Fouts, J. and Stuen, C. (1997), Copernicus Project: Learning with Laptops: Year 1 Evaluation Report (ERIC ED 416 847). Gottfried, J. and McFeely, M. (1998), Learning all over the place: integrating laptop computers into the classroom, Learning and Leading with Technology, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 6-12. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. (1995), Multivariate Data Analysis, 4th ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Hong, W., Thong, J.Y.L., Wong, W.M. and Tam, K.Y. (2001), Determinants of user acceptance of digital libraries: an empirical examination of individual differences and system characteristics, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 97-124. Legris, P., Ingham, J. and Collerette, P. (2003), Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model, Information and Management, Vol. 40, pp. 191-204. Lehner, F., Nosekabel, H. and Lehmann, H. (2003), Wireless e-learning and communication environment: WELCOME at the University of Regensburg, e-Service Journal, pp. 23-41. Luarn, P. and Lin, H.H. (2004), Toward an understanding of the behavioral intention to use mobile banking, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 25, pp. 873-91. Moore, G.C. and Benbasat, I. (1991), Development of instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation, Information Systems Research, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 192-222. Olsen, F. (2001), Colleges differ on costs and benets of ubiquitous computing, Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 47 No. 20, p. A45. Rieber, L.P. and Welliver, P.W. (1989), Infusing educational technology into mainstream educational computing, International Journal of Instructional Media, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 21-32. Rola, M. (2002), Building IT into lesson plans, Computing Canada, Vol. 28 No. 22, p. 28. Tomek, I. and Muldner, T. (1999), Acadia advantage Evolution and experiences, Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 7 Nos 2-3, pp. 175-94. Varvel, V.E. Jr and Thurston, C. (2002), Perceptions of a wireless network, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 487-501. Venkatesh, V. (2000), Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model, Information Systems Research, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 342-65. Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F.D. (2000), A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal eld studies, Management Science, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 186-204. Watters, C., Conley, M. and Alexander, C. (1998), The digital agora: using technology for learning in the social sciences, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 50-7.

Appendix. Laptop initiative questionnaire

Investigating students perceptions 347

Figure A1. Laptop initiative questionnaire

CWIS 23,5

348

Figure A1.

About the authors Dr Susan Elwood is an Assistant Professor of Educational Technology in the College of Education at Texas A&M University Corpus Christi. She has approximately 20 years experience in public and private, international, and national teaching, as well as multiple grants related to pedagogical application of basic integrated technologies. Dr Elwoods research interests include higher-order thinking skills applications of basic integrated applications within portable computing environments, especially related to reality based learning. Dr Elwood has published in the International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education. She has made numerous presentations at national and international conferences. Susan Elwood can be contacted at: elwoods@falcon.tamucc.edu Dr Chuleeporn Changchit is an Associate Professor of Management Information Systems at Texas A&M University Corpus Christi. Drawing from experiences working for over ve years as a senior consultant in industry, she provides her students with practical and comprehensive

instructions, shares ideas and techniques enthusiastically, and enjoys substantial successes as an educator. Dr Changchit is also actively engaged in the scholarly activities. Her articles have been published in several journals, such as Decision Support Systems, Information Systems Journal, Expert Systems with Applications, and International Journal of Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance, and Management. She also serves on the editorial review board for several journals, such as Information Resources Management Journal, the Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, Journal of Global Information Technology, and the International Journal of E-Business Research. Dr Robert Cutshall is an Assistant Professor of Management Information Systems at Texas A&M University Corpus Christi. Dr Cutshalls current interests are in the areas of technology in higher education, electronic commerce design, decision support systems, and expert systems. His publications have appeared in journals such as Journal of Computer Information Systems and Industrial Management & Data Systems. In addition, he has made numerous presentations at national and international conferences.

Investigating students perceptions 349

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints