Theoretical Background

EPSA is still a new concept to developing countries like Malaysia despite the fact that
EPSA has been developed by INTAN since 2007. The UTAUT model suggests that when
users are presented with a new technology, a number of factors influence their decision about
how and when they will use it. The UTAUT Model proposed by Venkatesh et al., (2003),
incorporates eight famous Models/Theories in the diverse discipline. The idea behind the
unifications of these Models/Theories is to arrive at the unified view of user acceptance of ecommerce in Nigeria (Venkatesh et al., 2003; Abdulwahab and Dahalin, 2010). A lot of
literature exists in understanding technology acceptance in general (Abdulwahab and
Dahalin, 2010), but there is limited research on e-learning in developing countries
particularly in Malaysia

The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) is a technology

acceptance model formulated by Venkatesh and others in "User acceptance of information
technology: Toward a unified view". The UTAUT aims to explain user intentions to use
an information system and subsequent usage behaviour. The theory holds that there are four
key constructs:
1) performance expectancy,
2) effort expectancy,
3)social influence, and
4) facilitating conditions.

The first three are direct determinants of usage intention and behaviour, and the fourth
is a direct determinant of use behaviour. Gender, age, experience, and voluntariness of use are

posited to moderate the impact of the four key constructs on usage intention and behaviour.
The theory was developed through a review and consolidation of the constructs of eight
models that earlier research had employed to explain information systems usage behaviour.
The eight models are
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Theory Of Reasoned Action,

Technology Acceptance Model,
Motivational Model,
Theory Of Planned Behaviour,
A Combined Theory Of Planned Behaviour/Technology Acceptance Model,
Model Of Personal Computer Use,
Diffusion Of Innovations Theory and
Social Cognitive Theory.

Subsequent validation by Venkatesh et al. (2003) of UTAUT in a longitudinal study

found it to account for an impressive 70% of the variance in Behavioural Intention to Use
(BI) and about 50% in actual use.

Because of its novelty in the field of user acceptance research and relatively little
presence in existing literature regarding e-learning in public sector, UTAUT was chosen as a
ground theory in this study for investigating the acceptance of teachers in using EPSA.

UTAUT has been tested in several cultures and organizational contexts. Research on
cross-cultural validation of UTAUT includes a study on employees acceptance and use of
computers in Saudi (Al-Gahtani, Hubona, & Wang, 2007), Educational technology
acceptance in Turkey (G, & Nistor, 2012), MP3 player and Internet banking in Korea
(Im, Hong, & Kang, 2011), among others. Mixed support for the original UTAUT theory was
found when UTAUT was applied in other cultural contexts which led some researchers to
argue that UTAUT should be extended to include cultural constructs alongside the current
constructs.

Besides being tested in several cultures, UTAUT has also been tested in several
organizational contexts including healthcare organizations (e.g., Venkatesh, Sykes, & Zhang,
2011; Ifinedo, 2012), business organizations (e.g., Anderson & Schwager, 2004), government
organizations (e.g., Zhan, Wang, & Xia, 2011), and Educational institutions (e.g., Birsch &
Irvine 2009). There has been some research suggesting adding contextspecific constructs to
UTAUT. For example, Vekatesh et als (2012) paper on consumer acceptance and use of
information technology suggests adding three constructs to UTAUT: hedonic motivation,
price value, and habit, for the context of consumer technology use. Similarly, Sun,
Bhattacherjee, and Ma (2009) suggested adding ITs perceived work compatibility to fit the
context of organizational work. However, there are still many contexts where the need for
additional constructs in UTAUT has to be explored.

This research focuses on students acceptance and use of technology in their academic
institutions in an attempt to compare the results with the original UTAUT findings and
explore whether context specific constructs should be added to UTAUT, specifically,
constructs related to students and the academic environment. Literature on technology in
education have studied the effect of faculty and peers encouragement (Martins &
Kellermanns, 2004), availability of technology (Chung, 2002), TOE (technological,
organizational and environmental) factors (Mills, 2008), educational compatibility (Chen,
2011), among others on the acceptance, diffusion, use, or effectiveness of technology in
higher-education institutions. Previous studies using UTAUT as a model to evaluate user
acceptance and use of technology, have several purpose and methodological differences
leading to different conclusions about the applicability of UTAUT in higher-education
institutions.

The use of UTAUT in an educational environment is that some studies survey

students on technologies that are not newly introduced to them. For example, a study on
educational technology acceptance using UTAUT (Gogus & Nistor, 2012) studied the
computer as a learning tool, with specific references to office software, information search on
the internet, communication and interaction between internet users (p. 398) which also
includes email, discussion forums and chat. Another study by Marchewka, liu and Kostiwa
(2007) studied students perceptions of using Blackboard (p. 103) when the students were
already familiar with that technology and had been using it prior to the study. The authors
reported that the study did not find strong support for the UTAUT model (p. 103). Despite
the interesting findings and questions these studies provide, they do not follow the same
methodology as the original UTAUT study with regards to the timing of the survey.

Research that studies a technology familiar to the users, contrary to the original
UTAUT study, are not longitudinal studies that evaluate user acceptance over time; rather,
they capture the users perception at one point only, well after the users acceptance or
rejection decision. The original UTAUT study focuses on user acceptance of technologies
that are newly introduced to capture the users first perception and how that perception
changes with increased experience of using the technology. Consistent with the original
UTAUT model, this study is examining new technologies that are introduced to the users and
measures their first impression about it currently, and how their perception and adoption
decision change over time.

Figure 3 presents the research model with hypothesised relationships between

UTAUT constructs.
Performance expectancy is the degree to which an individual believes that using
EPSA will help him or her to attain gains in motivation. The following hypothesis is
proposed:

H1: Performance expectancy is related to attitudes toward using EPSA

.
It has been shown by Venkatesh et al. [16], that performance expectancy is the
strongest predictor of intention to use a technology. Accordingly, the following hypothesis is
proposed:

H2: Performance expectancy is related to behavioural intentions.

Effort expectancy is the degree of ease associated with the use of a system (EPSA).
So, the next hypothesis is proposed :

H3: Effort expectancy is related to attitudes towards using EPSA.

.
The perceived ease of use assumes that a system perceived to be easier to use is more
likely to induce perception of usefulness and behavioural intention. Therefore, the following
hypothesis are formulated:

H4: Effort expectancy is related to behavioural intention.

Social influence is the degree to which an individual perceives that important people
believe they should use the new system. Venkatesh et al. stated that social influence as a
direct determinant of behavioural intention is represented as a subjective norm in various.
Accordingly, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H5: Social influence is positively related to attitudes towards using EPSA.

H6: Social influence is positively related to behavioural intention.

Facilitating conditions are defined as the degree to which an individual believes that
an organisational and technical infrastructure exists to support the use of a system. The
construct facilitating conditions stands for the factors and resources that an individual
believes exist to support their activities. Therefore the following hypothesis is proposed:

H7: Facilitating conditions is related to use of EPSA.

Attitude toward using technology is an individuals overall affective reaction to using

a system. It stands for an individuals liking, enjoyment, joy and pleasure associated with
technology use. The attitude toward using a system has been shown as a determinant of
behavioural intention in different studies. So, the following hypothesis is suggested:

H8: Attitudes toward use is related to behavioural intention.

The behavioural intention is a significant determinant of actual use of technology in

different intention models, therefore the following hypothesis is proposed:

H9: Behavioural intention is related to actual use of the Moodle system.

1. Venkatesh, Viswanath; Morris, Michael G.; Davis, Gordon B.; Davis, Fred D.
(2003-01-01). "User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified
View". MIS Quarterly 27 (3): 425478.
2. Abdulwahab and Dahalin, 2010