Các yếu tố ảnh hưởng đến sự chấp nhận phương pháp học tập kết hợp trong giáo dục y khoa: ứng dụng mô hình UTAUT2
Tóm tắt
Học tập kết hợp là một phương pháp mới nhằm cải thiện chất lượng giáo dục y khoa. Sự chấp nhận phương pháp học tập kết hợp đóng vai trò quan trọng trong việc triển khai hiệu quả phương pháp này. Do đó, mục tiêu của nghiên cứu này là điều tra và xác định các yếu tố có thể ảnh hưởng đến ý định của sinh viên trong việc sử dụng học tập kết hợp.
Trong nghiên cứu tương quan cắt ngang này, mẫu nghiên cứu gồm 225 sinh viên ngành khoa học y tế Iran. Khung lý thuyết để thiết kế mô hình khái niệm là Mô hình lý thuyết chấp nhận và sử dụng công nghệ thống nhất 2 (UTAUT2). Venkatesh và các đồng nghiệp (2012) đề xuất UTAUT2 như một khung để giải thích hành vi của một người khi sử dụng công nghệ. Dữ liệu được phân tích bằng phần mềm SPSS-18 và AMOS-23. Kỹ thuật mô hình phương trình cấu trúc được sử dụng để kiểm tra các giả thuyết.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Herbert C, Velan GM, Pryor WM, Kumar RK. A model for the use of blended learning in large group teaching sessions. BMC Med Educ. 2017;17(1):197.
Salim H, Lee PY, Ghazali SS, Ching SM, Ali H, Shamsuddin NH, et al. Perceptions toward a pilot project on blended learning in Malaysian family medicine postgraduate training: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18(1):206.
Ilic D, Hart W, Fiddes P, Misso M, Villanueva E. Adopting a blended learning approach to teaching evidence based medicine: a mixed methods study. BMC Med Educ. 2013;13(1):169.
Langenau EE, Lee R, Fults M. Blended learning educational format for third-year pediatrics clinical rotation. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2017;117(4):234–43.
Coyne E, Rands H, Frommolt V, Kain V, Plugge M, Mitchell M. Investigation of blended learning video resources to teach health students clinical skills: an integrative review. Nurse Educ Today. 2018;63:101–7.
Garrison DR, Vaughan ND. Blended learning in higher education: framework, principles, and guidelines. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons; Published by Jossey-Bass A Wiley Imprint; 2008.
Graham CR. Emerging practice and research in blended learning. Handbook of distance education. 2013;3:333–50.
Wu J, Liu W. An empirical investigation of the critical factors affecting students' satisfaction in EFL blended learning. J Language Teach Res. 2013;4(1):176–85.
Medina LC. Blended learning: deficits and prospects in higher education. Aust J Educ Technol. 2018;34(1):42–56.
Keržič D, Tomaževič N, Aristovnik A, Umek L. Exploring critical factors of the perceived usefulness of blended learning for higher education students. PloS one. 2019;14(11):e0223767.
Seraji F, Attaran M, Azizi SM. Blended learning researches in Iran: several fundamental criticisms. Digital Educ Rev. 2019;36:190–206.
Margulieux LE, Bujak KR, McCracken WM, Majerich D. Hybrid, blended, flipped, and inverted: Defining terms in a two dimensional taxonomy. In: Proceedings of the 12th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Education. Honolulu; 2014. Available from: https://c21u.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/papers/HICE%20Conference%20Proceedings_1556_with%20citation%5B4%5D.pdf.
Liu Q, Peng W, Zhang F, Hu R, Li Y, Yan W. The effectiveness of blended learning in health professions: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(1):e2.
Chen J, Zhou J, Wang Y, Qi G, Xia C, Mo G, et al. Blended learning in basic medical laboratory courses improves medical students’ abilities in self-learning, understanding, and problem solving. Adv Physiol Educ. 2020;44(1):9–14.
Rowe M, Frantz J, Bozalek V. The role of blended learning in the clinical education of healthcare students: a systematic review. Med Teach. 2012;34(4):e216–e21.
Morton CE, Saleh SN, Smith SF, Hemani A, Ameen A, Bennie TD, et al. Blended learning: how can we optimise undergraduate student engagement? BMC Med Educ. 2016;16(1):195.
Kiviniemi MT. Effects of a blended learning approach on student outcomes in a graduate-level public health course. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14(1):47.
Bazelais P, Doleck T. Blended learning and traditional learning: a comparative study of college mechanics courses. Educ Inf Technol. 2018;23(6):2889–900.
Karamizadeh Z, Zarifsanayei N, Faghihi A, Mohammadi H, Habibi M. The study of effectiveness of blended learning approach for medical training courses. Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2012;14(1):41.
Zhao G, Yuan S. Key factors of effecting blended learning satisfaction: a study on Peking University students. International Conference on Hybrid Learning. Berlin: Springer; 2010. pp. 282–95.
García AVM, del Dujo ÁG, Rodríguez JMM. Factores determinantes de adopción de blended learning en educación superior. Adaptación del modelo UTAUT. Educación XX1. 2014;17(2):217–40.
Tang C, Chaw L. Readiness for blended learning: understanding attitude of university students. Int J Cyber Soc Educ. 2013;6(2):79–100.
Yeou M. An investigation of students’ acceptance of Moodle in a blended learning setting using technology acceptance model. J Educ Technol Syst. 2016;44(3):300–18.
Venkatesh V, Thong JY, Xu X. Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Q. 2012;36(1):157–78.
Chao C-M. Factors determining the behavioral intention to use mobile learning: an application and extension of the UTAUT model. Front Psychol. 2019;10:1652.
Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003;27(3):425–78.
Abdekhoda M, Dehnad A, Mirsaeed SJG, Gavgani VZ. Factors influencing the adoption of E-learning in Tabriz University of Medical Sciences. Med J Islamic Republic of Iran. 2016;30:457.
Tarhini A, Masa’deh R, Al-Busaidi KA, Mohammed AB, Maqableh M. Factors influencing students’ adoption of e-learning: a structural equation modeling approach. J Int Educ Bus. 2017;10(2):164–82.
Hoque R, Sorwar G. Understanding factors influencing the adoption of mHealth by the elderly: an extension of the UTAUT model. Int J Med Inform. 2017;101:75–84.
Jahanbakhsh M, Peikari HR, Hazhir F, Saghaeiannejad-Isfahani S. An investigation into the effective factors on the acceptance and use of integrated health system in the primary health-care centers. J Edu Health Promot. 2018;7:128 .
Šumak B, Šorgo A. The acceptance and use of interactive whiteboards among teachers: differences in UTAUT determinants between pre-and post-adopters. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;64:602–20.
Nguyen TD, Nguyen DT, Cao TH. Acceptance and use of information system: E-learning based on cloud computing in Vietnam. Information and Communication Technology-EurAsia Conference. Berlin: Springer; 2014. pp. 139-49.
Moorthy K, Yee TT, T'ing LC, Kumaran VV. Habit and hedonic motivation are the strongest influences in mobile learning behaviours among higher education students in Malaysia. Aust J Educ Technol. 2019;35(4):174–91.
Sattari A, Abdekhoda M, Zarea GV. Determinant factors affecting the web-based training acceptance by health students, applying UTAUT model. Int J Emerg Technol Learn. 2017;12(10):112–26.
Huang C-Y, Kao Y-S. UTAUT2 based predictions of factors influencing the technology acceptance of phablets by DNP. Math Probl Eng. 2015;(1):1–23.
Limayem M, Hirt SG, Cheung CM. How habit limits the predictive power of intention: The case of information systems continuance. MIS Quarterly. 2007;31(4):705–37.
Ngampornchai A, Adams J. Students’ acceptance and readiness for E-learning in northeastern Thailand. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2016;13(1):34.
Suki NM, Suki NM. Determining students’ behavioural intention to use animation and storytelling applying the UTAUT model: the moderating roles of gender and experience level. Int J Manage Educ. 2017;15(3):528–38.
Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res. 1981;18(1):39–50.
Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, Seventh edition, Pearson new international edition. Harlow; 2014.
Azizi SM, Khatony A. Investigating factors affecting on medical sciences students’ intention to adopt mobile learning. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19(1):381.
Cheon J, Lee S, Crooks SM, Song J. An investigation of mobile learning readiness in higher education based on the theory of planned behavior. Comput Educ. 2012;59(3):1054–64.
Ain N, Kaur K, Waheed M. The influence of learning value on learning management system use: an extension of UTAUT2. Inf Dev. 2016;32(5):1306–21.
Dewi KC, Ciptayani PI, Surjono HD. Critical success factor for implementing vocational blended learning. J Phys Conf Ser. 2018;953(1):012086.
Warnecke E, Pearson S. Medical students' perceptions of using e-learning to enhance the acquisition of consulting skills. Australas Med J. 2011;4(6):300.
El-Masri M, Tarhini A. Factors affecting the adoption of e-learning systems in Qatar and USA: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology 2 (UTAUT2). Educ Technol Res Dev. 2017;65(3):743–63.
Ravangard R, Kazemi Z, Abbasali SZ, Sharifian R, Monem H. Development of the UTAUT2 model to measure the acceptance of medical laboratory portals by patients in shiraz. Electron Physician. 2017;9(2):3862.
Hsu LL, Hsieh SI. Factors affecting metacognition of undergraduate nursing students in a blended learning environment. Int J Nurs Pract. 2014;20(3):233–41.
Dajani D, Hegleh ASA. Behavior intention of animation usage among university students. Heliyon. 2019;5(10):e02536.
Liu D, Maimaitijiang R, Gu J, Zhong S, Zhou M, Wu Z, et al. Using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) to investigate the intention to use physical activity apps: cross-sectional survey. JMIR mHealth and uHealth. 2019;7(9):e13127.