바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
 

logo

  • P-ISSN1738-3110
  • E-ISSN2093-7717
  • SCOPUS, ESCI

원격교육환경에서 기술수용모델과 상호(相互)작용이 고객만족에 미치는 영향

Perceived Interaction in Online Classes and Technology Acceptance Model to Student Satisfaction

The Journal of Distribution Science(JDS) / The Journal of Distribution Science, (P)1738-3110; (E)2093-7717
2009, v.7 no.3, pp.25-48
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.7.3.200909.25
이정완 (보스턴대학교)
김영이 (서울디지털대학교)

초록

본 연구의 목적은 기술수용모델이 원격교육환경에서 인지된 상호(相互)작용에 미치는 영향을 탐색하고, 확장된 기술수용모델이 원격교육환경에서의 고객만족에 미치는 영향을 총체적으로 탐색하고자 하였다. 자료는 2009년 봄 학기에 원격교육대학에 등록된 842명의 학생들로부터 수집하였다. 또한 수집된 자료는 요인분석과 구조방정식 모형을 이용하여 분석하였다. 자료 분석 결과, 인지된 유용(有用)성이 원격교육환경에서의 인지된 상호(相互)작용과 유의한 관계를 가지고 있으며, 인지된 용이(容易)성, 유용(有用)성, 그리고 인지된 상호(相互)작용이 모두 고객만족에 유의한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다.

keywords
기술수용모델, 원격교육, 고객만족, 상호(相互)작용, 대화(對話)참가, 통신(通信) 도구, 구조방정식

Abstract

This paper examines an augmented technology acceptance model, which includes perceived interaction as a mediator in the relationships between the technology acceptance model (perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness) and student satisfaction in online classes, and its impact on student satisfaction. Data has been collected from 842 undergraduate students in online universities. The data is analyzed by using factor analysis and structural equation modeling techniques. The results demonstrate that perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and perceived interaction serve as predictors for student satisfaction in online classes. Perceived usefulness has a positive relationship with perceived interaction while perceived ease of use has no effect on interaction.

keywords
기술수용모델, 원격교육, 고객만족, 상호(相互)작용, 대화(對話)참가, 통신(通信) 도구, 구조방정식

참고문헌

1.

Abrahamson, C. E. (1998). Issues in interactive communication in distance education. College Student Journal, 32 (1), 33-43.

2.

Allen, M., Bourhis, J., Burrell, N., & Marbry, E. (2002). Comparing student satisfaction with distance education to traditional classrooms in higher education: A meta-Analysis. American Journal of Distance Education, 16 (2), 83-97.

3.

Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with Internet based MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 24 (1), 32-54.

4.

Arbuckle, J.L. (2006) AMOS (version 6.0). Chicago, IL: SmallWaters.

5.

Bambara, C.S., Harbour, C.P., Davies, T.G., & Athey, S. (2009). Delicate engagement:the lived experience of community college students enrolled in high-risk online courses. Community College Review, 36 (3) (Jan. 2009), 219-238.

6.

Basile, A., & D’Aquila, J.M. (2002). An experimental analysis of computer-mediated instruction and student attitudes in a principles of financial accounting course. Journal of Education for Business, 77 (3), 137-143.

7.

Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.

8.

Borstorff, P.C., & Lowe, S.K. (2007). Student perceptions and opinions toward e-learning in the college environment. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 11 (2) (May 2007), 13-29.

9.

Carr, S. (2000). As distance education comes of age, the challenge is keeping the students. Chronicle of Higher Education, 46 (23), A39-A41.

10.

Carroll, J. M. (2001). Community computing as human-computer interaction. Behavior and Information Technology, 20 (5), 307-314.

11.

Chyung, S. Y. (2001). Systemic effects of improving the motivational appeal of online instruction on Adult distance education. Paper presented at the 82nd annual meeting of the American Education Research Association (AERA), April 10-14, 2001, Seattle, WA, USA.

12.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13 (3), 319-340.

13.

Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35 (8), 982-1003.

14.

Dawson, S. (2006). A study of the relationship between student communication interaction and sense of community. The Internet and Higher Education, 9 (3), 153-162.

15.

DeBourgh, G. A. (1999). Technology is the tool, teaching is the task: Student satisfaction in distance learning. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, February 28-March 4, 1999, San Antonio, TX, USA.

16.

Efron, B. (1987). Better bootstrap confidence intervals. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 171-185.

17.

Fulford, C. P., & Zhang, S. (1993). Perceptions of interaction: The critical predictor in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 7 (3), 8-21.

18.

Gallini, J. K., & Helman, N. (1995). Audience awareness in technology-mediated environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 13, 245-261.

19.

Garrison, R. (2000). Theoretical challenges for distance education in the 21st century: A shift from structural to transactional issues. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 1 (1), 1-17.

20.

Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. (2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: An integrated model. MIS Quarterly, 27 (1), 51-90.

21.

Hagel, P., & Shaw, R. N. (2006). Students' perceptions of study modes. Distance Education, 27 (3), 283-302.

22.

Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2000). Students' distress with a web-based distance education course, CSI Working Paper, Indiana University, retrieved June 22, 2008 from http://rkcsi.indiana.edu.ezproxy.bu.edu/archive/CSI/WP/wp00-01B.html.

23.

Hayduk, L.A. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL: Essentials and advances. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

24.

Hentea, M., Shea, M. J., & Pennington, L. (2003). A Perspective on Fulfilling the Expectations of Distance Education. Paper presented at the Proceeding of the 4th conference on Information technology curriculum, Lafayette, Indiana, USA.

25.

Jason, L.A., Kennedy, C.L., & Taylor, R.R. (2001). Development and evaluation of a web-based classroom. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28(3), 155-160.

26.

Karahanna, E., & Straub, D.W. (1999). The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and perceived ease-of-use. Information & Management, 35 (4), 237-250.

27.

Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W., & Chervany, N.L. (1999). Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Quarterly, 23 (2), 183-213.

28.

Keil, M., Beranek, P.M., & Konsynski, B.R. (1995). Usefulness and ease of use: Field study evidence regarding task considerations. Decision Support Systems, 13 (1), 75-91.

29.

Klesius, J., Homan, S., & Thompson, T. (1997). Distance education compared to traditional instruction: The students' view. International Journal of Instructional Media, 24 (3), 207-220.

30.

Korean Educational Development Institute (2008). Brief statistics on Korean Education. Statistical Materials SM2008-9-2. Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://cesi.kedi.re.kr/index.jsp

31.

Lawson, T.J. (2000). Teaching a social psychology course on the web. Teaching of Psychology, 27 (4), 285-289.

32.

Lederer, A.L., Maupin, D.J., Sena, M.P., & Zhuang, Y. (2000). The technology acceptance model and the World Wide Web. Decision Support Systems, 29, 269-282.

33.

Leon, R.V., & Parr, W.C. (2000). Use of course home pages in teaching statistics. The America Statistician, 54 (1), 44-48.

34.

Levin, T., & Wadmany, R. (2006). Listening to students' voices on learning with information technologies in a rich technology-based classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34 (3), 281-317.

35.

Liao, L. (2006). A flow theory perspective on learner motivation and behavior in distance education. Distance Education, 27 (1), 45-62.

36.

Lin, Y. (2005). Understanding students' technology appropriation and learning perceptions in online learning environments, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia.

37.

Maor, D. (2003). The teacher's role in developing interaction and reflection in an online learning community. Computer Mediated Communication, 40 (1/2), 127-137.

38.

Mitchell, T. J. F., Chen, S. Y., & Macredie, R. D. (2005). The relationship between web enjoyment and student perceptions and learning using a web-based tutorial. Learning, Media and Technology, 30 (1), 27-40.

39.

Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2005). Distance education: A systems view (2nd Ed.), Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

40.

Morris, M.G., & Dillon, A. (1997). The influence of user perceptions on software utilization: Application and evaluation of a theoretical model of technology acceptance. IEEE Software, 14 (4), 56-75.

41.

Muilenburg, L.Y., & Berge, Z. L. (2005). Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. Distance Education, 26 (1), 29-48.

42.

Nicol, D., Minty, L., & Sinclair, C. (2003). The social dimensions of online learning. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 40 (3), 270-280.

43.

O’Donoghue, J., Singh, G., & Dorward, L. (2001). Virtual education in universities: A technological imperative. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32 (5), 511-523.

44.

Picciano, A.G. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning, 6 (1), 21-40.

45.

Rahm, D., & Reed, B. J. (1998). Tangled Webs in Public Administration: Organizational issues in distance learning. Public Administration and Management: An Interactive Journal, 3 (1), Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://www.pamij.com/rahm.html.

46.

Roach, V., & Lemasters, L. (2006), Satisfaction with online learning: A comparative descriptive study. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 5 (3), 317-332.

47.

Robinson, C.C., & Hullinger, H. (2008). New benchmarks in higher education: student engagement in online learning. Journal of Education for Business, 84 (2) (Nov-Dec 2008), 101-108.

48.

Rovai, A. P. (2002a). Building Sense of Community at a Distance. International Review /of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3 (1), Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewFile/79/153.

49.

Rovai, A. P. (2002c). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 5, 319-332.

50.

Rovai, A. P. (2003b). Sense of community in a higher education television-based distance education program. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51 (2), 5-16.

51.

Salmon, G. (2000). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. London: Kogan-Page.

52.

Schwier, R. (2002). Shaping the metaphor of community in online learning environments, Retrieved October 1, 2009, from http://cde.athabascau.ca/ISEC2002/papers/schwier.pdf.

53.

Schwitzer, A., Ancis, J., & Brown, N. (2001). Promoting student learning and student development at a distance: Student affairs principles and practices for televised instruction and other forms of distance learning (2nd Ed.), Lanham, MD: American College Personnel Association: University Press of America.

54.

Sener, J., & Humbert, J. (2003). Student satisfaction with online learning: an expanding universe. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education: Practice and Direction (pp. 245-260). Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.

55.

Sloman, M. (2001). The e-learning revolution. London: CIPD.

56.

Steiger, J.H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173-180.

57.

Stine, R.A. (1989). An introduction to bootstrap methods: Examples and ideas. Sociological Methods and Research, 18, 243-291.

58.

Swan, K. (2001). Virtual interaction: Design factors affecting student satisfaction and perceived learning in asynchronous online courses. Distance Education, 22 (2),306-331.

59.

Szajna, B. (1996). Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science, 42 (1), 85-92.

60.

Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Liu, X. (2006). Teaching Courses Online: A Review of the Research. Review of Educational Research, 76 (1), 93-136.

61.

Venkatesh, V. (1999). Creation of favourable perceptions: Exploring the role of intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly, 23 (2), 239-260.

62.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F.D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27 (3), 451-481.

63.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F.D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46 (2), 186-204.

64.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., & Davis, F.D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27 (3), 425-478.

65.

Vonderwell, S. (2003). An examination of asynchronous communication experiences and perspectives of students in an online course: a case study. The Internet and Higher Education, 6 (1), 77-90.

66.

Wang, M., Sierra, C., & Folger, T. (2003). Building a dynamic online community among adult learners. Education Media International, 40 (1/2), 49-61.

67.

Wenger, E. (1996). Communities of practice: the social fabric of the learning organization. HealthCare Forum Journal, 39 (4), 20-26.

68.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

69.

White, C. (2005). Contribution of distance education to the development of individual learners. Distance Education, 26 (2), 165-181.

70.

Woods Jr., R.H. (2002). How much communication is enough in online courses? Exploring the relationship between frequency of instructor-initiated personal email and learners' perceptions of and participation in online learning. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29 (4), 377-394.

71.

Zhang, W., Perris, K., & Yeung, L. (2005). Online tutorial support in open and distance learning: Students' perceptions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36 (5), 789-804.

The Journal of Distribution Science(JDS)