Journal of Computational Science 23 (2017) 173–180

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Computational Science

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jocs

Student perceptions of cloud applications effectiveness in higher

education
Sadaf Ashtari ∗ , Ali Eydgahi
Eastern Michigan University, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Cloud computing technology use in higher education institutions is rapidly expanding and becoming a
Received 13 December 2015 more integral part of the collegiate experience. This expansion of the use of cloud applications comes with
Received in revised form some significant learning and adoption challenges to the end users along with the technical advantages
23 September 2016
that allow greater accessibility and ease of use. The influence of individual user perceptions toward these
Accepted 17 December 2016
technologies is an issue that merits further investigation. Several technology acceptance models have
Available online 3 January 2017
demonstrated some degree of success in predicting adoption behaviors utilizing individual user traits
and beliefs. However, there have been limited investigations of variables after the technology has been
Keywords:
Cloud computing
implemented and used. This paper focuses on the associations between variables identified in the litera-
Higher education ture that are considered to be influencing use and perceptions of technology for undergraduate students
Usefulness of technology at a mid-sized university in Southeast Michigan. The results statistically present signifi-
Self-efficacy cant correlations between each measured variable and support the interaction between perceived ease
Computer anxiety of use, computer anxiety, computer self-efficacy, and internet self-efficacy with the perceived usefulness
of cloud applications in a higher education setting.
© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction cloud computing technology in order to maximize the benefits of

Currently, cloud computing is developing into a flexible, collab-
orative, cost effective and scalable computational approach that is
quickly being adopted by both public and private organizations. The
use of cloud-based applications is substantially increasing among
higher education organizations. One of the recent cloud computing
tracking poll [1] has reported that 43% of organizations in higher
education have implemented or maintained cloud computing in
2012. This number represents a 10% increase from the 2011 poll
data and is expected to continue to rise in the coming years.
The process of learning is one of the most basic human charac-
teristics that tends to easily adopt and utilize technology. In recent
years, the new techniques and technological tools have continu-
ously been implemented in educational systems. The use of cloud
computing is increasingly becoming popular in the educational
environments as it provides low-cost services to students and uni-
versity staff [2]. However, it is necessary to consider the individual
characteristics of the users and their perceptions about using the
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sashtari@emich.edu (S. Ashtari).
its usage.
This study investigates the relationship between some of the
individual factors such as information technology self-efficacy,
computer anxiety, perceived ease of use, and the users’ percep-
tion of the usefulness and effectiveness of cloud-based applications
that are known to impact technology adoption. Also, different cloud
computing tools that are utilized by the participants are evalu-
ated from the perspective of their effectiveness in support of their
learning experience. Additionally, this preliminary study sought
to identify the most popular cloud applications in use among the
undergraduate students surveyed, and to give insight into the stu-
dents’ reasons for the use of these cloud-based applications.
2. Cloud computing
It is difficult to define cloud computing by a single term as there
are many debates and challenges by researchers about a standard
definition for it. While the debates for final definition continue to
evolve with the advancement of the technology, there are some
characteristics of cloud computing that seem to be common to
most of the definitions in the literature. The similarities between
cloud computing and other types of high performance comput-
ing (HPC) such as cluster computing, grid computing, peer-to-peer

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jocs.2016.12.007
1877-7503/© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
174 S. Ashtari, A. Eydgahi / Journal of Computational Science 23 (2017) 173–180
computing, service-oriented computing and market-oriented com-
puting add complications to the efforts for creating a standardized
cloud computing definition and methodology.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
defines cloud computing as a model for enabling ubiquitous, conve-
nient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable
computing resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications
and services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with
minimal management effort or service provider interaction [3]. In
[4], cloud computing is referred to as a new operation rather than
a new technology. Furthermore, cloud computing is actually a set
of existing technologies that are operating businesses in a differ-
ent way [4]. In [5], cloud computing is defined as a convergence of
grid computing, utility computing and software-as a-service (SaaS),
which is a new concept of cloud computing. In [6], the design of
next generation data centers is introduced as an objective for cloud
technology application. It is argued that by intentionally designing
data centers as networks of virtual services (hardware, database,
user-interface, application logic), users could gain access to their
applications from everywhere.
2.1. Cloud computing services and deployment models
Based on [3] cloud computing can be viewed as a triad of ser-
vice models consisting of Software as a Service (SaaS), Platform
as a Service (PaaS) and Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS). The SaaS
model of cloud computing involves the cloud provider offering the
application to the end user on or through a cloud infrastructure. In
this case the consumer does not manage or control the underlying
cloud infrastructure including network, servers, operating systems,
or data storage. Cloud applications using the SaaS model can either
be accessed through a program interface in the way that Drop-
box works or directly through a client interface as is the case with
web-based email like Gmail.
PaaS model of cloud computing provides the consumer a
platform to deploy applications into the wider existing cloud infras-
tructure. PaaS gives the end user a space to build their own
application using shared languages, libraries and services that are
either supplied or supported by the cloud platform provider. Exam-
ples of this model include Heroku and the Google App Engine.
The IaaS cloud technology model provides the processing, stor-
age, networks, and other fundamental computing resources that
allow consumers to deploy and run the software of their choice.
This can include programs and application and can even extend
to running operating systems via the cloud infrastructure service.
Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure are prominent exam-
ples of the IaaS providers.
In [3], four distinct deployment models for cloud technology
applications namely private cloud, community cloud, public cloud
and hybrid cloud are described. Based on [8], a private cloud is
operated solely within a single organization and either the organi-
zation or a third party could manage the infrastructure. Concerns
about security issues are one of the main reasons for choosing a pri-
vate cloud deployment model in an organization [8]. In an academic
setting, the ability to build a private cloud to keep proprietary mate-
rials secured and to facilitate an online educational community are
another advantage of a private cloud deployment.
In community cloud, several organizations jointly use the same
cloud infrastructure and a third party or one of the organizations
could host the infrastructure. The advantages of a shared cloud
include minimizing loss or failure risks by spreading the resources
and decreasing costs by utilizing shared scalable resources. At the
same time, to be successful, sharing resources requires a higher
degree of agreement and cooperation, which can be a challenge
among higher education institutions that are each trying to best
promote their own needs and may actually be viewed as competi-
tors to one another.
A public cloud is the most common form of cloud deployment
with which students, instructors or faculty have experience. In a
public cloud deployment, the service provider has full ownership
of the infrastructure. Many of the most popular cloud services fit
into the public cloud deployment model. These services include
Amazon EC2, Amazon S3, Google Drive, and Microsoft One Drive.
The final deployment model, hybrid cloud, is a combination
of two or more of the other cloud deployment models (private,
community, or public) that aims to address the limitation of each
approach by combining different aspects of each model. As a gen-
eral rule, hybrid cloud deployments have more flexibility and range
of use than either public or private clouds.
2.2. Cloud computing for education
The advantages that cloud computing can provide to educators
and students make it an attractive option in university envi-
ronments. The ability to collaboratively share, edit, process, and
store huge amounts of data have obvious applications within the
research and educational communities. Another distinct advantage
to users of cloud computing is the availability and ease of access
using their own equipment, mobile devices, university equipment,
or some combination of these options at whatever time or place
they find most beneficial.
In [9], one of the main characteristics of cloud computing is
identified as economies of scale. This feature assures cloud services
could be delivered at a lower cost when compared with in-house
mainframe computers, networks, and computer infrastructure that
are expected to be provided by the educational institutions. As
stated in [10], applying information technology tools could pro-
vide access to more resources in a global scale and as a result could
increase the quality of learning. Additionally, the use of information
technology resources, including cloud computing, could reduce the
cost of resource usages and ease the sustainability of education.
Learning needs of a new generation of students are different
from their predecessors [11]. As a result, they favor increased use
of technology and its successful applications. The cloud comput-
ing applications can benefit students by providing them with quick
connections to the core materials and with each other. According to
[11], cloud computing can provide higher educations with the fol-
lowing benefits: (a) allowing for the use of the users own personal
workspace; (b) facilitating interactive teaching and learning com-
munities; (c) no need for backup due to shared cloud storage; and
(d) the availability of large amounts of processing power. Cloud
computing can also provide a digital learning environment, per-
sonal portfolio, and web-based self-service options for students and
faculty alike.
The potential gains that cloud computing can bring to the higher
learning environments are numerous while the potential risks
include the concerns about security, privacy, and issues related to
the reliability and performance of the technology [12]. Cloud com-
puting can also provide a digital learning environment, personal
portfolio, and web-based self-service options for students and fac-
ulty alike. In [12], the benefits of cloud computing for students are
described as: (a) ubiquitous availability of online applications; (b)
flexibility to create structured learning environments; (c) support
for mobile learning; and (d) scalability
Eastern Michigan University (EMU) began using web-based
online course materials and class interfaces in 1999. This effort was
on the margins of cloud computing, but as an early adopter, EMU
continued to expand the online, and eventually cloud supported,
course support applications and resources. Each successive version
added more functionality and relied more heavily on cloud com-
puting to meet the needs of the largely commuter student body.
 S. Ashtari, A. Eydgahi / Journal of Computational Science 23 (2017) 173–180
The cloud-based educational application of EMU-Online was imple-
mented in 2010 and by 2014 became the sole source of course
information utilized by all students enrolled in classes. EMU-Online
provides students with access to class email functions, shared doc-
uments, threaded discussions, and gradebook access in a single
secured web-portal. In 2014, EMU enabled direct student access
to Google cloud suite (Apps, Drive, and Gmail) in both the student
records portal and the EMU-Online shell. Currently, the university
is transitioning from EMU-Online to a new cloud-based application
called Canvas, which provides similar functionalities to its prede-
cessor, but with a simplified user interface.
3. Theory and hypotheses
There are numerous competing models for analyzing the imple-
mentation or adoption behaviors of users of new technologies.
The Technology Organization Environment (TOE) model [13] was
developed to analyze IT adoption by firms with an emphasis on
the organizational characteristics and environment in which the
technology is to be deployed. The Human Organization Technology
Fit (HOT-Fit) model [14] was proposed as an alternate structure
for health information system technology adoption focusing on the
interaction of the user, organization and the application. The HOT-
Fit model is a combination of the Information System Success model
[15] and IT-Organization Fit model [16].
Another influential model in the field is the Technology Accep-
tance Model (TAM), which looks at the interaction of perceptions
of usefulness, ease of use, and attitudes to predict technology use
[17]. The original TAM model is one of the most widely used, vali-
dated, and researched models of technology acceptance in the field
of information technology [2]. According to the TAM model, user
acceptance is an important factor for successful adoption and uti-
lization of new technologies including the cloud-based applications
currently in use in the field of higher education. In [17,18], it is
suggested that an individual intention to use a technology, which
relates to user acceptance, is determined primarily by two beliefs:
perceived usefulness of the application and its perceived ease of
use.
User beliefs about the degree to which using the technology will
enhance their experience or performance relate to the perceived
usefulness of the application. The perceived ease of use relates to
the users’ belief that using the technology or application in question
will be free of effort. The general determinants of perceived ease
of use are addressed in [19], which argues several anchors related
to individuals’ general beliefs such as computer self-efficacy, com-
puter anxiety, computer playfulness and perceptions of external
control or facilitating conditions could form the early perceptions
for ease of use of a system.
“TAM theorizes that the effects of external variables (e.g., system
characteristics, development process, training) on intention to
use are mediated by perceived usefulness and perceived ease of
use”.
“According to TAM, perceived usefulness is also influenced by
perceived ease of use because, other things being equal, the
easier the system is to use the more useful it can be”.
For this initial study, we identified the specific components of
the TAM and Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use framework
designs that the literature led us to believe would be the most influ-
ential on user experiences of cloud computing to focus on in our
study. The theoretical framework we used in this study is presented
in Fig. 1. As user behaviors had already been well-established prior
to students’ participation in this study, we identified Perceived
Usefulness of cloud applications as our dependent variable. We
conceptualized Perceived usefulness in this study as the users’
175
Fig. 1. Theoretical Framework.
perceptions and feelings about the utility and effectiveness of cloud
applications in the context of their studies.
Based on a review of the literature, we anticipated that Com-
puter Self-efficacy, Internet Self-efficacy, Computer Anxiety, and
Perceived Cloud Ease of Use would have reciprocal associations
with Perceived Usefulness, and for our purposes, we conceptual-
ized them as independent variables. The initial goal of this project
was to determine if the variables that are influential in technol-
ogy acceptance behaviors remain so as modifiers of perceptions of
usefulness in continued interactions.
The main goal of this project was to determine whether the
variables that are influential in technology acceptance behaviors
remain the same as modifiers of perceptions of usefulness in con-
tinued interactions. Correlations were selected as the first measure
of these variables with the intention to more rigorously test the
constructs and scales in future studies.
We contend, based on applications of the theoretical principles
of social cognitive theory [21] and other work in this field such as
the TAM model, that the factors which influence acceptance and
implementation of new technology remain relevant even after its
acceptance. These relevant factors may contribute to ongoing per-
ceptions of the usefulness of the technological applications. If this
holds true for cloud computing, as it has for several other techno-
logical applications, then this may allow some insight into the areas
that could be leveraged to help users gain more confidence, skill,
self-efficacy, and ultimately improve their educational experiences
using cloud applications.
3.1. Computer/internet self efficacy
Both the TAM and determinants of Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU)
framework designs identify PEOU as a critical factor for technology
acceptance [17–22]]. External factors contribute to the perceptions
involved with technology applications and individual factors. The
psychological factors and individual differences also influence how
PEOU ratings for technology are perceived. Computer self-efficacy
and computer anxiety are two factors that have been found [19] to
have an impact on individual’s use of new technology.
According to [23], self-efficacy is a person’s belief in his or her
ability to do a task. In [24], computer self-efficacy was defined as an
individual judgment of one’s capability to use a computer. In [25],
self-efficacy was addressed with respect to information technol-
ogy use that “will continue to be a factor in our choices about what
technologies to adopt, how much to use them, and how much to
persist in the face of obstacles to successful use of such technolo-
gies”. Furthermore, self-efficacy is an important factor to consider
when determining whether students will adopt new technologies.
It is concluded from [25] that the decision of students to use a
new technology is more related to their own ability to use the
176 S. Ashtari, A. Eydgahi / Journal of Computational Science 23 (2017) 173–180
technology than the benefits they may gain from its use. In [26], it
was demonstrated that successful or positive experiences with sim-
ilar technologies may increase the self-efficacy of users for related
technologies.
While we contend that the skills and experiences using a per-
sonal computer are similar to those necessary to successfully adapt
cloud-based computing, there are sufficient differences between
cloud computing and desktop based applications that require addi-
tional factors to be considered when evaluating user self-efficacy.
Since the majority of cloud computing services relate to tasks on
the cloud or internet, it was determined that splitting the tech-
nology self-efficacy scale into component subscales of computer
self-efficacy and internet self-efficacy would be a more meaningful
examination of the user perceptions.
In [27], an instrument as the extension of computer self-efficacy
scale is developed, which focuses in the World Wide Web domain
and the internet. The internet self-efficacy scale is multidimen-
sional and measures the capabilities of the end user in interacting
with the internet. Also, it adds that the function of end-user self-
efficacy has more impact on technology use than aspects of how
the technology is designed.
3.2. Computer anxiety
In [28], it is suggested that cloud computing is one of the pop-
ular technologies of our time, but it is also the one that elicits the
most fear among users. Cloud computing users have greater safety
and security concerns compared with users of other technologies
[29]. Also, it was recommended in [29] that the cloud platforms
should devote more effort to convincing users of the safety of the
applications. Based on [28], the fear of cloud computing has left
many users confused about their options and in a state of hesita-
tion as participants indicated that they did not trust the cloud to
keep their information safe and that perceived risk resulted in fear
of use. It was suggested in [26] that the major factors influencing
apprehension relating to cloud computing are concerns relating to:
(a) privacy; (b) fears relating to loss of access to the data; and (c)
traditional informational technology security concerns like unau-
thorized access and loss relating to breaches of security.
According to [30], computer anxiety was defined as a complex
interplay of behavioral, emotional and attitudinal components. In
[31], computer anxiety is a resistance to talking about computers or
even thinking about computers, fear or anxiety towards comput-
ers, and hostile or aggressive thoughts about computers. Based on
[32], computer anxiety refers to negative emotions and cognitions
evoked in actual or imaginary interactions with computer-based
technology, which it affects the utilization of computer-based tech-
nology and performance on tasks that involve the use of computers.
3.3. Hypotheses
The following hypotheses are considered in this study:
H1. Computer self-efficacy is positively associated with the per-
ceived usefulness of cloud-based applications.
H2. Internet self-efficacy is positively associated with the per-
ceived usefulness of cloud-based applications.
H3. Information technology self-efficacy is positively associated
with the perceived usefulness of cloud-based applications.
H4. Computer anxiety is negatively associated with the perceived
usefulness of cloud-based applications.
H5. Perceived ease of use is positively associated with the per-
ceived usefulness of cloud-based applications.
H6. Internet self-efficacy has a stronger association to the per-
ceived usefulness of cloud-based applications than computer
self-efficacy.
H7a. The combined scale of Information Technology Self-efficacy,
which is comprised of Computer Self-efficacy and Internet Self-
efficacy has a stronger association with the perceived usefulness
of cloud-based applications than the computer self-efficacy scale
alone.
H7b. The combined scale of Information Technology Self-efficacy,
which is comprised of Computer Self-efficacy and Internet Self-
efficacy has a stronger association with the perceived usefulness of
cloud-based applications than the internet self-efficacy scale alone.
4. Methodology
In this study, the definition of cloud computing is close to the one
proposed by the NIST [3], in which those aspects that all cloud com-
puting applications must have in common are considered. Thus,
cloud computing in this study refers to the shared applications and
services that the surveyed students were using via the internet to
manage application activities or to access data stored on shared
servers.
4.1. Sample
The sample was limited to undergraduate students enrolled in
the College of Technology at Eastern Michigan University. The par-
ticipants were from two sections of an introduction to engineering
technology course. A total of 40 students were invited to partici-
pate in the survey; the response rate was 100.0% (n = 40). None of
the undergraduates surveyed were excluded from the analysis. The
survey is included in Appendix A.
4.2. Measures
The survey consisted of five demographic items, and 36 Likert-
type items divided into six Likert scales: (1) Cloud-Computing
Usage; (2) Perceived Usefulness; (3) Perceived Ease of Use; (4)
Computer Self Efficacy; (5) Internet Self Efficacy; and (6) Computer
Anxiety.
The scales for measuring the constructs are developed by uti-
lizing items from previously validated scales so that they are
more suitable for the cloud computing applications. The aggre-
gated Information Technology Self-Efficacy scale consists of the
items from the Internet Self-Efficacy and Computer Self-Efficacy
Likert-type scales.
The items of computer anxiety Likert-type scale used in this
study are modifications of the items from Computer Anxiety Rat-
ing Scale [32]. The Internet Self-Efficacy Scale [27] was used to
develop the Internet Self-Efficacy items and the Computer Self-
Efficacy Scale [33] contributed to the Computer Self-Efficacy items.
Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness items were drawn
in part from the Technology Acceptance Model Scale [17].
Conceptually, the individual characteristic scales of Internet
Self-Efficacy Scale, Computer Self-Efficacy, Internet Self-Efficacy,
and Computer Anxiety are separated from the Perceived Ease of
Use and Perceived Usefulness scales. The individual characteristic
constructs are measured using a 5-point Likert-type scales rang-
ing from 1 = “Disagree” to 5 = “Agree”. In an effort to better capture
directionality of decisions, the Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived
Usefulness Likert-type scales are given a larger 7-point range from
1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree”.
Face validity of the measures is addressed by having two full
professor faculty members with field expertise review the items
and scales.
 S. Ashtari, A. Eydgahi / Journal of Computational Science 23 (2017) 173–180 177

Table 1 Table 2
Demographics of Sample. Cronbach’s Alpha Testing.

Total Number of Participant (n): 40 Variables Cronbach ␣ Items

Gender N Percent Computer Anxiety 0.82 6

Male 35 87.5% Computer Self-efficacy 0.92 6
Female 5 12.5% Internet Self-efficacy 0.85 6
IT Self-efficacy 0.92 12
Age
Perceived Ease of Use 0.96 6
18–19 Years 23 57.7%
Perceived Usefulness 0.95 6
20–21 Years 6 15.0%
22–23 Years 6 15.0%
24–25 Years 1 2.5%
26–27 Years 3 7.5% scale is ranging from 0.82 to 0.96, which exceeds the recommended
28 Years or More 1 2.5% acceptability value of 0.70.
Ethnicity
White 19 47.5% 5.3. Use of cloud technologies
African-American 14 35.0%
Asian 5 12.5% As it is expected of students enrolled in a technology program,
Other 1 5.0%
all participants had at least some experience with cloud comput-
Student Status ing. A 97.5% of participants (n = 39) indicated that they are utilizing
Freshman 24 60.0% the cloud-based university class management application, EMU-
Sophomore 9 22.5%
Junior 6 15.0%
Online.
Senior 1 2.5% The majority of the students (97.5%, n = 39) were utilizing at least
two forms of cloud technology and 87.5% were using three or more
Major at EMU
Mechanical Engineering 23 57.5% applications. Most of the participants had been using the internet
Computer Engineering 9 22.5% for more than 7 years (92.5%, n = 37) and all had used the internet
Electrical Engineering 4 10.0% for more than 4 years (n = 40). In Fig. 2, summary of the participants’
Product Design 2 5.0% use of cloud computing applications is presented.
Accounting 1 2.5%
The reasons given by participants for using cloud applications
Physical Engineering 1 2.5%
in order of frequency, were: (1) 85.0% spoke about accessibility
(n = 34); (2) 80.0% noted the ability to share data (n = 32); (3) 57.5%
mentioned the low cost (n = 23); (4) 57.5% liked the ability to back
4.3. Data collection procedure
up files; and (5) 50.0% favored the large storage capacity.
A few participants responded to an item that was asking about
The convenience population selected for this study was regis-
the reasons that make them not use cloud services. The most com-
tered students of two sections of a freshman course, Introduction to
mon answers involved concerns about data privacy, fear of losing
Engineering Technology, at EMU. A link to the survey was posted
data, and difficulty of application use.
in the announcements section of the course management appli-
cation at EMU-Online. The survey was administered using Google
5.4. Hypothesis testing
Drive, responses were unidentified and were exported directly into
Microsoft Excel for statistical analysis. The data was re-formatted
Correlational analysis using a Spearman rank-order correlation
in excel and imported into the SPSS application for further analysis.
was performed to determine whether significant associations exist
between the variables being examined. A strong and significant
4.4. Statistical analysis (p < 0.01) relationship between the Computer Self-Efficacy scale
and the user’s Perception of the Usefulness of cloud applications
The descriptive statistics were reviewed using SPSS v22. (rs(37) = 0.80) allows the rejection of the null for H1. There was also
Exploratory data analysis was conducted to identify trends and a strongly positive association between Internet Self-Efficacy and
potential findings. Nonparametric correlational analysis was per- Perceived Usefulness (rs(38) = 0.71, p < 0.01), causing the rejection of
formed on each of the Likert-type scales and on demographic items. null H2. H3 predicted a positive correlation (rs(37) = 0.83, p < 0.01)
Cronbach alpha calculations were reviewed for each scale. between Information Technology Self-Efficacy and the users’ Per-
ceptions of the Usefulness of the cloud technology in use, therefore,
the null hypothesis was rejected for H3.
5. Results and discussion
Computer Anxiety was found to have statistically significant
negative correlations with each of the independent variables and
5.1. Descriptive statistics
also with the Perceived Usefulness (rs(37) = −0.55, p < 0.01). This
Participants’ age ranged from 18 to 28 with a mean age of 20.475
and a standard deviation of 2.8 years. Most of the students were
male (87.5%, n = 35), either Freshman (60.0%, n = 24) or Sophomore
(22.5%, n = 9), and listed their ethnicity as either White (47.5%,
n = 19) or African-American (35.0%, n = 14). The demographic data
of the participants is displayed in Table 1.

5.2. Analysis of the results

The Cronbach’s alpha was run on each scale as an indication of

internal consistency and as a test of the reliability of each of the
Likert-type scales. As shown in Table 2, the Cronbach ␣ for each Fig. 2. Percentage of Participants Using Cloud Applications.
178 S. Ashtari, A. Eydgahi / Journal of Computational Science 23 (2017) 173–180
Fig. 3. Spearman Rank-Order Correlations.
supports rejection of the null in H4. The theoretical model used
would suggest there was a very strong relationship between Per-
ceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness (rs(38) = 0.93) that was
statistically significant at a p value of 0.01; for this reason, the null
for H5 was rejected.
To evaluate the hypotheses that deal with comparisons,
Spearman rank-order correlations were run and the strength of sig-
nificant associations was compared at the p = 0.01 value. We failed
to reject the null in H6 as we found that Computer Self-Efficacy
(rs(37) = 0.80) had a slightly stronger association to Perceived Use-
fulness than Internet Self-Efficacy (rs(38) = 0.71).
The seventh Hypothesis suggested that the combined scale for
Information Technology Self-Efficacy would have a stronger asso-
ciation to Perceived Usefulness than either of the two component
scales at the same p values (p < 0.01). Finding that Information
Technology Self-Efficacy in fact did have a stronger correlation
(rs(37) = 0.83), than either Computer Self-Efficacy or Internet Self-
Efficacy (rs(38) = 0.71) caused us to reject the null in H7a and H7b.
Significant associations are presented in Fig. 3.
5.5. Discussion
The primary goal of this paper was to investigate if the con-
structs used to predict technology acceptance remain important
after the decision to adopt the technology has already been made.
Specifically, we looked at cloud computing applications among uni-
versity students in the field of technology, because it was our belief
that their focus on technology would likely cause them to have a
substantial level of experience with cloud computing. While we
acknowledge that this is only a preliminary study, our results sug-
gest that among the population sampled, the constructs identified
in the TAM and Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use model [19]
remain important in the evaluation of the technology long after its
adoption.
A bulk of prior research into technology acceptance has been
limited to studies of business models or technology use predic-
tion. This critical research has set the stage for the next direction
of acceptance research. By using the variables shown to have pre-
dictive qualities, researchers can begin to examine the factors that
influence continued use and perceptions of the technologies in use.
Using this approach, it is our hope that future researchers of tech-
nology in the field of higher education will be able to identify factors
that lead to best practices and timely interventions to improve
student success.
Given that cloud technologies are a combination of platform,
software, and infrastructure services that go beyond desktop com-
puting and internet use, it is our belief that self-efficacy for cloud
applications will involve some combination of both skills. The
results found suggest that a combined model drawing from more
aspects of internet technology will be more useful in further exam-
inations of cloud computing.
6. Limitations and future research
This study has a number of limitations that should be men-
tioned here and should be addressed in future research. The scales
used in this study were developed from well-reviewed and strin-
gently validated studies. However, they have not been validated
in their current form. The Cronbach ␣’s found support their use,
but a more thorough validation of the scales is suggested for future
research. The use of a small convenience sample is a further limi-
tation of this study. Drawing the sample from a population that is
familiar with interacting with technology and that have substan-
tial experience operating the cloud-based EMU-Online educational
portal may have influenced the strength of the association; it is our
hope that we can expand both the size and the populations sam-
pled in future research. Furthermore, the number of male students
in the STEM, especially Technology major, is substantially bigger
than female population. The influence of Ethnicity as a moderator
variable could be worth examining in the future study.
Future research evaluating the ability of the factors identified
in predictive models of technology acceptance expand our under-
standing of the interaction between people and technology. It is
also our hope that through the study of these factors, researchers
are able to identify points of leverage that can be used to improve
the state of technology use for users and organizations alike. This
path of investigation can also lead to training best practices imple-
mentable in technology development and delivery that would
improve the experience and utility of future cloud applications [7].
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Dr. Alphonso Bellamy for his support,
advice and very timely editing assistance. We would also like to
express our appreciation to the Office of Research Development
and Matthew Dick in providing resources to help support research
at Eastern Michigan University.
 S. Ashtari, A. Eydgahi / Journal of Computational Science 23 (2017) 173–180 179

Appendix A. Survey Questions Computer Self Efficacy

The following questions are 36 Likert-type items divided into The following set of questions are related to your general com-
six Likert scales: (1) Cloud-Computing Usage; (2) Perceived Use- puter/IT skills. Please use the following scale when responding to
fulness; (3) Perceived Ease of Use; (4) Computer Self Efficacy; (5) the following items. Disagree–1–2–3–4–5–-Agree
Internet Self Efficacy; and (6) Computer Anxiety.
1 I feel confident getting any software up and running
2 I feel confident escaping/exiting from any program or software
Cloud-Computing Usage 3 I feel confident troubleshooting computer problems
4 I feel confident getting help for problems in the computer systems
1. How long have you been using the Internet? 5 I feel confident writing simple programs for the computers
2. Are you using cloud applications such as EMU Online, Dropbox, 6 I feel confident learning to use a variety of programs (software)
Google Drive and etc.?
3. What types of cloud application do you use? Internet Self Efficacy
a EMU Online
b Dropbox 1 I feel confident finding information on the World Wide Web
c Google Drive (WWW)
d Apple iCloud 2 I feel confident surfing among different web browsers such as
e Amazon Cloud Drive Internet explorer, Mozilla, Chrome and etc.
4. What are your reasons for using cloud services? 3 I feel confident to have a collaborative discussion (chatting) over
a Accessibility (access from any place with any device) the Internet
b Share data with my classmate and friends 4 I feel confident opening the attachment of email messages that I
c Low cost (ex. Google Drive is free) receive
d Enough storage capacity 5 I feel confident downloading from the Internet
e Make a backup of my files 6 I feel confident uploading my assignment over the Internet
f Editable
g Not applicable
5. What are your reasons for not using cloud services? Computer Anxiety
a Worried about data privacy
b Fear of losing data 1 I worry about making mistakes on the computer
c Difficult to use 2 It scares me to think that I could cause the computer to destroy
d No need a large amount of information by hitting the wrong key
e Not enough storage 3 I am terrified of being connected to the internet, someone might
f Not applicable be tracking me
4 I feel anxious whenever I am using computers
5 I feel anxious every time I use a new program
Perceived Usefulness 6 I experience anxiety whenever I sit in front of a computer termi-
nal.
The following set of questions are related to cloud-
based application usage only. Please use the following References
scale when responding to the following items. Strongly
disagree–1–2–3–4–5–6–7–Strongly agree [1] CDW Report, From Tactic To Strategy: The CDW 2013 Cloud Computing
Tracking Poll, 2013 (last Access on 30 May 2015) http://www.cdwnewsroom.
com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CDW 2013 State of The Cloud Report
021113 FINAL.pdf.
1 Using cloud applications at EMU would enable me to accomplish [2] T.S. Behrend, E.N. Wiebe, J.E. London, E.C. Johnson, Cloud computing adoption
tasks more quickly and usage in community colleges, Behav. Inf. Technol. 30 (2) (2011) 231–240.
2 Using cloud applications would improve my study performance [3] P. Mell, T. Grance, The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing, 2011, National
Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication, 2014 (800-145).
3 Using cloud applications at EMU would increase my productivity [4] S.Y. Jing, S. Ali, K. She, Y. Zhong, State-of-the-art research study for green
4 Using cloud applications would enhance my effectiveness in my cloud computing, J. Supercomput. 65 (1) (2013) 445–468.
courses [5] D. Zissis, D. Lekkas, Addressing cloud computing security issues, Future Gener.
Comput. Syst. 28 (3) (2012) 583–592.
5 Using cloud applications would make it easier to do my home-
[6] A. Beloglazov, A. Abawajy, R. Buyya, Energy-aware resource allocation
work heuristics for efficient management of data centers for cloud computing,
6 I would find cloud applications useful in doing my assignments Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 28 (5) (2012) 755–768.
[7] M. Tebaa, S. El Hajji, A. El Ghazi, Homomorphic encryption applied to the
cloud computing security, in: Proceedings of the World Congress on
Engineering, July 4–6, London, UK, 2012 (Vol. 1).
Perceived Ease of Use [8] T. Dillon, C. Wu, E. Chang, Cloud computing: issues and challenges,
Proceedings of 24th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Information
Networking and Applications (2010) 27–33.
1 Learning to use cloud applications would be easy for me
[9] A.S. Weber, Cloud computing in education, in: Ubiquitous and Mobile
2 I would find it easy to get cloud applications to do what I want it Learning in the Digital Age, Springer, New York, 2013, pp. 19–36.
to do [10] L.M. Vaquero, EduCloud: paaS versus IaaS cloud usage for an advanced
3 My interaction with cloud applications would be clear and under- computer science course, IEEE Trans. Educ. 54 (4) (2011) 590–598.
[11] M.A.H. Masud, X. Huang, An e-learning system architecture based on cloud
standable computing, System 10 (11) (2012).
4 I would find cloud applications to be flexible to interact with [12] J.A. González-Martínez, M.L. Bote-Lorenzo, E. Gómez-Sánchez, R. Cano-Parra,
5 It would be easy for me to become skillful at using any cloud Cloud computing and education: a state-of-the-art survey, Comput. Educ. 80
(2015) 132–151.
applications [13] L.G. Tornatzky, M. Fleischer, A.K. Chakrabarti, Processes of Technological
6 I would find cloud applications easy to use Innovation, Lexington Books, 1990.
180 S. Ashtari, A. Eydgahi / Journal of Computational Science 23 (2017) 173–180
[14] M.M. Yusof, J. Kuljis, A. Papazafeiropoulou, L.K. Stergioulas, An evaluation
framework for Health Information Systems: human, organization and
technology-fit factors (HOT-fit), Int. J. Med. Inf. 77 (6) (2008) 386–398.
[15] W.H. Delone, E.R. Mclean, Measuring e-commerce success: applying the
DeLone & McLean information systems success model, Int. J. Electron.
Commer. 9 (1) (2004) 31–47.
[16] M.S.S. Morton, The Corporation of the 1990: Information Technology and
Organizational Transformation, Oxford University Press, 1991.
[17] F.D. Davis, Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of
information technology, MIS Q. (1989) 319–340.
[18] M. Esmaeili, Assessment of Users’ Information Security Behavior in
Smartphone Networks., Doctoral Dissertation, Eastern Michigan University,
2014.
[19] V. Venkatesh, Determinants of perceived ease of use: integrating control,
intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model, Inf.
Syst. Res. 11 (4) (2000) 342–365.
[20] V. Venkatesh, F.D. Davis, A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance
model: four longitudinal field studies, Manage. Sci. 46 (2) (2000) 186–204.
[21] A. Bandura, D. Cervone, Differential engagement of self-reactive influences in
cognitive motivation, Org. Behav. Hum. Decis. Processes 38 (1) (1986) 92–113.
[22] M. Esmaeili, A. Eydgahi, The effects of undergraduate project-based courses
on student attitudes toward STEM classes, Int. J. Eng. Res. Innov. 6 (2) (2014)
66–72 (Fall/Winter).
[23] A. Bandura, Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change,
Psychological Review 84 (2) (1977) 191.
[24] D.R. Compeau, C.A. Higgins, Computer self-efficacy: development of a
measure and initial test, MIS Q. (1995) 189–211.
[25] D.R. Compeau, C.A. Higgins, S. Huff, Social cognitive theory and individual
reactions to computing technology: a longitudinal study, MIS Q. (1999)
145–158.
[26] R. Bates, S. Khasawneh, Self-efficacy and college students’ perceptions and
use of online learning systems, Comput. Hum. Behav. 23 (1) (2007) 175–191.
[27] G. Torkzadeh, T.P. Van Dyke, Development and validation of an Internet
self-efficacy scale, Behav. Inf. Technol. 20 (4) (2001) 275–280.
[28] A. Ume, The fear and phobia of the cloud and cloud computing, J. Educ. Soc.
Res. 2.8 (2012) 147–154.
[29] K. SO, Cloud computing security issues and challenges, Int. J. Comput. Netw. 3
(5) (2011).
[30] D. Gilbert, L. Lee-Kelley, M. Barton, Technophobia, gender influences and
consumer decision-making for technology-related products, Eur. J. Innov.
Manage. 6 (4) (2003) 253–263.
[31] T. Jay, Computerphobia: what to do about it, Educ. Technol. 21 (1) (1981)
47–48.
[32] R.K. Heinssen, C.R. Glass, L.A. Knight, Assessing computer anxiety:
development and validation of the computer anxiety rating scale, Comput.
Hum. Behav. 3 (1) (1987) 49–59.
[33] C.A. Murphy, D. Coover, S.V. Owen, Development and validation of the
computer self-efficacy scale, Educ. Psychol. Meas. 49 (4) (1989) 893–899.
Sadaf Ashtari is the PhD candidate in Technology Manage-
ment at Eastern Michigan University and also is a doctoral
fellow at College of Technology. Her field of research is in
Information Technology Application in Healthcare at East-
ern Michigan University. Her research interest is in Health
Informatics, Business Intelligence, Data Warehousing and
Data Mining, Machine Learning and Cloud Computing.
Before she started her study in the United State, she was a
researcher at Iran Telecommunication Research Center for
four years. She also has experience of working in indus-
try. She has worked in mobile network company in Iran as
an information technology system analyst for two years.
Her paper won the best paper award at Graduate research
Conference at Eastern Michigan University.