You are here:

Development and Validation of a Model to Investigate the Impact of Individual Factors on Instructors’ Intention to Use E-learning Systems

, Spartanburg Community College, United States ; , Nova Southeastern University, United States

IJELLO Volume 6, Number 1, ISSN 1552-2237 Publisher: Informing Science Institute


E-learning is becoming an increasingly important part of higher education institutions. However, instructors’ use of e-learning systems in community colleges in the United States is relatively sparse. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate some individual factors that may affect instructors’ intention to use e-learning systems in community colleges. In this study, we proposed a theoretical model predicting instructors’ intention to use e-learning systems in community colleges based on their resistance to change, perceived value of e-learning systems, computer self-efficacy, and attitude toward e-learning systems. The sample for this study included 119 (over 41% response rate) full-time, part-time, and adjunct instructors in different academic departments at a community college. Our findings indicate that the theoretical model developed was able to predict instructors’ intention to use e-learning systems. All four predictive variables have significant effects on intention to use e-learning systems. Two statistical methods were used to formulate and test predictive models: Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) and Ordinal Logistic Regression (OLR). Results of both models were consistent on resistance to change as having the greatest weight on predicting instructors’ intention to use e-learning systems, while computer self-efficacy in both analyses was found to have the least weight. We conclude the paper with a discussion, which includes a summary of the results, limitations of this research study, as well as implications for practice and future research.


Ferdousi, B. & Levy, Y. (2010). Development and Validation of a Model to Investigate the Impact of Individual Factors on Instructors’ Intention to Use E-learning Systems. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 6(1), 1-21. Informing Science Institute. Retrieved February 18, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you're having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage, MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665-694.
  2. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). New York: Springer.
  3. Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 27-58.
  4. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  5. Albirini, A. (2006). Teachers’ attitudes toward information and communication technologies: The case of Syrian EFL teachers. Computers& Education, 47(4), 373-398.
  6. Allen, E.I., & Seaman, J. (2006). Making the grade– Online education in the United States, 2006. BABSON Survey Research Group. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium.
  7. Badu-Nyarko, K.S. (2006). Faculty attitude towards distance education: A review of the literature. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 3(5), Article04. Retrieved November 12, 2007, from
  8. Bagozzi, P.R., & Yi, Y. (1989). The degree of intention formation as a moderator of the attitude-behavior relationship. Social Psychology Quarterly, 52(4), 266-279.
  9. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  10. Beaudry, A., & Pinsonneault, A. (2005). Understanding user responses to information technology: A coping model of user adaptation. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 493-524.
  11. Bhattacherjee, A., & Premkumar, G. (2004). Understanding changes in belief and attitude toward information technology usage: A theoretical model and longitudinal test. MIS Quarterly, 28(2), 229-254.
  12. Blignaut, P., Burger, A., McDonald, T., & Tolmie, J. (2005). Computer attitude and anxiety. Encyclopedia of Information Science and Technology, 495-501.
  13. Bovey, W.H., & Hede, A. (2001). Resistance to original change: The role of defense mechanisms. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 16(7/8), 534-548.
  14. Brown, A.S., & Venkatesh, V. (2005). Model of adoption of technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household lifecycle. MIS Quarterly, 29(3), 399-426.
  15. Chen, L., Gillenson, L.M., & Sherrell, L.D. (2004). Consumer acceptance of virtual stores: A theoretical model and critical success factors for virtual stores. ACM SIGMIS Database, 35(2), 8-31.
  16. Chiu, C-M., Hsu, M-H., Sun, S-Y, Lin, T-C., & Sun, P-C. (2005). Usability, quality, value, and e-learning continuance decisions. Computers& Education, 45, 399-416.
  17. Cohen, A.M. (2005). UCLA community college review: Why practitioners and researchers ignore each other (even when they are same person). Community College Review, 33(1), 51-62.
  18. Compeau, D.R., & Higgins, C.A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189-211.
  19. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.
  20. Fuller, R.M., Vician, C., & Brown, S.A. (2006). E-learning and individual characteristics: The role of computer anxiety and communication apprehension. The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 46(4), 103-115.
  21. Giangreco, A. (2002). Conceptualization and operationalisation of resistance to change. Liuc Papers N., 103, 1-28.
  22. Greer, H.T., & Murtaza, B.M. (2003). Web personalization: The impact of perceived innovation characteristics on the intention to use personalization. The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 43(3), 50-55.
  23. Gwebu, K.L., & Wang, J. (2007). The role of organizational, environmental and human factors in elearning diffusion. International Journal of Web-based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 2(2), 5978.
  24. Hasan, B. (2003). The influence of specific computer experiences on computer self efficacy beliefs. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 443-450.
  25. Hoffmann, J.P. (2004). Generalized linear models: An applied approach. Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.
  26. Hultman, K. (2003). Resistance to change, managing. Encyclopedia of Information Systems, 3, 693-705.
  27. Igbaria, M., & Ivari, J. (1995). The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage. Omega-International Journal of Management Science, 23(6), 587-605.
  28. Johnson, G.M., & Howell, A.J. (2005). Attitude toward instructional technology following required versus optional WebCT usage. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 643-654.
  29. Kaplowitz, D.M., Hadlock, D.T., & Levine, R. (2004). A comparison of web and mail survey response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68, 94-101.
  30. Karahanna, E., Straub, W.D., & Chervany, N.L. (1999). Information technology adoption across time: Across-sectional comparison of pre-adoption and post-adoption beliefs. MIS Quarterly 23(2), 183-213.
  31. Kim, J.K., & Bonk, J.C. (2006). The future of online teaching and learning in higher education: The survey says……A survey substantiates some ideas about online learning and refutes others. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 29(4), 1-14.
  32. Kim, H., Chan, H.C., & Gupta, S. (2007). Value-based adoption of mobile internet: An empirical investigation. Decision Support Systems, 43, 111–126.
  33. Kisker, C.B., & Outcalt, C.L. (2005). Community college honors and developmental faculty: Characteristics, practices, and implications for access and educational equity. Community College Review, 33(2), 1-21.
  34. Lammers, W.J., & Murphy, J.J. (2003). A profile of teaching techniques used in the university classroom. Active Learning in Higher Education, 3(1), 54-67.
  35. Levy, Y. (2006). Assessing the value of e-learning systems. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.
  36. Levy, Y., & Murphy, E.K. (2002). Toward a value framework for online learning systems. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science (HICSS’02), USA, 1, 5.
  37. Liaw, S., Huang, H., & Chen, G. (2007). Surveying instructor and learner attitudes toward e-learning. Computer and Education, 49, 1066-1080.
  38. Mahdizadeh, H., Biemans, H., & Mulder, M. (2007). Determining factors of the use of e-learning environments by university teachers. Computers& Education. 1-13.
  39. Marakas, M.G., Johnson, D.R., & Clay. P.F. (2007). The evolving nature of the computer self-efficacy construct: An empirical investigation of measurement construction, validity, reliability and stability over time. Journal of Association for Information Systems, 8(1), 16–46.
  40. Markus, L. (1983). Power, politics, and MIS implementation. Communications of the ACM, 26(6), 430444.
  41. Naidu, S. (2004). Trends in faculty use and perceptions of e-learning. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 2(2), 1-8.
  42. Nevill, C.S., & Zimbler, L. (2006). Institutional policies and practices regarding postsecondary faculty: Fall 2003. National Center for Educational Statistics– Institute of Education Science. U.S. Department of Education, 157, 1-36.
  43. Ngai, E.W.T., Poon, L.K.J., & Chan, Y.H.C. (2007). Empirical examination of the adoption of WebCT using TAM. Computers& Education, 48, 250-267.
  44. Premkumar, G., & Bhattacherjee, A. (2006). Explaining information technology usages: A test of competing models. Omega – The International Journal of Management Science, 36, 64-75.
  45. Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.
  46. Sam, K.H., Othman, A.E.A., & Nordin, S.Z. (2005). Computer self-efficacy, computer anxiety, and attitude toward the internet: A study among undergraduate in Unimas. Educational Technology and Society, 8(4), 205-219.
  47. Selim, H.M. (2003). An empirical investigation of student acceptance of course websites. Computers& Education, 40, 343-360.
  48. Selim, H.M. (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: Confirmatory factor models. Computer& Education, 49, 396-413.
  49. Shih, H. (2008). Using a cognitive-motivation-control view to assess the adoption intention for Web-based learning. Computer& Education, 50, 327-337.
  50. Sun, H. (2003). An integrative analysis of TAM: Toward a deeper understanding of technology acceptance model. Proceeding of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) ’03, Tampa, FL.
  51. Thatcher, J.B, & Perrewe, P.L. (2002). An empirical examination of individual traits as antecedents to computer anxiety and computer self-efficacy. MIS Quarterly, 26(4), 381-396.
  52. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, B.G., & Davis, F.D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-454.
  53. Yohon, T., Zimmerman, D., & Keeler, L. (2004). An exploratory study of adoption of course management software and accompanying instructional changes by faculty in the liberal arts and sciences. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 2(2), 313-320.
  54. Zywno, S.M. (2002). Attitude of engineering faculty towards technology-assisted instruction– a polemic. World Transaction on Engineering and Technology Education, 1(1), 47-50.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact