E-Learning Usability Measurement-Using Technology Acceptance Model and Usability Test

With the convenience of wireless network and Web page browsing, Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) merging with E-learning has become a new trend for mobile learning. However, the existing E-learning interface is designed for personal computer not a customized interface for portable device. In this study, we recruited 30 management college students for using PDA on campus with pre-specified E-learning tasks. While the participants performed a task, the clicks on web page linkage and eye browsing track were recorded for measuring the performance. At the end of test, the participants were required to fill out a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) questionnaire for measuring the degree of acceptance level. The study finding shows that the participant’s different experience of using PDA will result in an inconsistency between the belief of technology acceptance and the performance of task execution. The reason can be explained by tester’s different recognition toward a general purpose task and a specific task measurement scope. The existing researches seldom studied on the measurement of usability test and TAM with a specific task execution. As a result, future research may continue to explore and validate the relationship between the belief of technology acceptance and the attributes of usability. Moreover, the list of usability problems of PDA operation, browser operation, and E-learning interface will be valuable reference for practitioner while developing a system interface.

[1]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models , 1989 .

[2]  Mun Y. Yi,et al.  Understanding information technology acceptance by individual professionals: Toward an integrative view , 2006, Inf. Manag..

[3]  羅嘉琳,et al.  探討對行動學習輔具科技接受模式的研究; A Study on Mobile Learning Device- Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) , 2004 .

[4]  Heinz Ulrich Hoppe,et al.  One-to-One Technology-Enhanced Learning: an Opportunity for Global Research Collaboration , 2006, Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn..

[5]  Jan Stage,et al.  New techniques for usability evaluation of mobile systems , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[6]  Anu Kankainen,et al.  Usability testing of mobile applications: a comparison between laboratory and field testing , 2005 .

[7]  Tonya L. Smith-Jackson,et al.  Systematic evaluation methodology for cell phone user interfaces , 2006, Interact. Comput..

[8]  Raafat George Saadé,et al.  The impact of cognitive absorption on perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in on-line learning: an extension of the technology acceptance model , 2005, Inf. Manag..

[9]  Elizabeth M Borycki,et al.  Technology induced error and usability: The relationship between usability problems and prescription errors when using a handheld application , 2005, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[10]  Stephen R. Gulliver,et al.  Pervasive and standalone computing: the perceptual effects of variable multimedia quality , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[11]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test† , 1996 .

[12]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[13]  Gordon C. Bruner,et al.  Explaining consumer acceptance of handheld Internet devices , 2005 .

[14]  Dongsong Zhang,et al.  Challenges, Methodologies, and Issues in the Usability Testing of Mobile Applications , 2005, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[15]  Mark C. Russell.  Investigating contributions of eye-tracking to website usability testing , 2006 .

[16]  Mikael Goldstein,et al.  Towards an improved readability on mobile devices: evaluating adaptive rapid serial visual presentation , 2002, Interact. Comput..

[17]  Jen-Her Wu,et al.  Mobile computing acceptance factors in the healthcare industry : A structural equation model , 2006 .

[18]  Kristian Kiili,et al.  Evaluating WAP usability: "what usability?" , 2002, Proceedings. IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education.

[19]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[20]  Marino Menozzi,et al.  Information access at the point of care: what can we learn for designing a mobile CPR system? , 2004, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[21]  Fethi Calisir,et al.  The relation of interface usability characteristics, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use to end-user satisfaction with enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems , 2004, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[22]  Ron Henderson,et al.  Perceived usefulness, ease of use and electronic supermarket use , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..