See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/351496868

Behavioural Intention to Use E-Learning from student's perspective during

COVID-19 Pandemic

Conference Paper · November 2020

DOI: 10.1109/AiCIS51645.2020.00035

CITATIONS READS
27 855

4 authors, including:

Alaa S. Jameel Mohammed Abdulkarem

Cihan University Cihan University
44 PUBLICATIONS   618 CITATIONS    14 PUBLICATIONS   215 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Abd Rahman Ahmad

Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
161 PUBLICATIONS   1,112 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Technology Adoption and Acceptance View project

Article View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alaa S. Jameel on 14 May 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 2020 2nd Annual International Conference on Information and Sciences (AiCIS)

Behavioural Intention to Use E-Learning from

student's perspective during COVID-19 Pandemic
Alaa S Jameel
Faculty of Technology Management
and Business
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
Batu Pahat, Johor, Malaysia
2020 2nd Annual International Conference on Information and Sciences (AiCIS) | 978-1-7281-9169-0/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/AICIS51645.2020.00035
Souhila N Abdalla
Department of Public Administration
Cihan university-Erbil
Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
souhila.najim@cihanuniversity.edu.iq
Mohammed A. Karem
Department of Public Administration
Cihan university-Erbil
Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
mohammad.abdulkarem@cihanuniversi
ty.edu.iq

salam.alaa23@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3189-1961

Abd Rahman Ahmad

Faculty of Technology Management
and Business
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
Batu Pahat, Johor, Malaysia
arahman@uthm.edu.my

in normal situations. In addition, some students prefer E-

Abstract—During the COVID-19 pandemic, E-learning
resources played a critical role to help educators organize,
prepare, implement and track the learning and teaching process
in the higher education system. The purpose of this study is to
determining the effect of the dimensions of the UTAUT2 model
on the behavioral intention (BI) of Iraqi students to use e-
learning, the UTAUT2 consists of performance expectancy (PE),
effort expectancy (EE), social influence (SI), facilitating
conditions (FC), hedonic motivation (HM), price value (PV), and
habit (HA) as proposed by the Unified Theory of Acceptance
and use of Technology (UTAUT2) on Iraqi students’ behavioral
intention to use E-learning. This study employed quantitative
methodology that utilized the deductive approach and the study
variables were examined via hypothesis testing. The purposive
sampling was applied for sample selection and questionnaire
were distributed by using Google Forms among undergraduate
students at Cihan university Erbil, Iraq. Overall, 213 valid
responses were analyzed by using Structural Equation
Modelling (SEM). The result indicated the positive and
significant impact of PE, EE, FC and HA on behavioral
intention to use E-learning among students. However, SI, HM
and PV were insignificant. The decision Makers should enhance
the performance of system at university to meet the expectation
of students as well improve the facilitating at universities. The
results of the study are useful for universities, teachers and
educators, decision-makers at universities and higher education
system in designing and implementing their online system, as
well as in making appropriate decisions to allow an increased
number of university students to embrace E-learning.
Keywords— Behavioral Intention, UTAUT2, E-Learning,
COVID-19, university.
I. INTRODUCTION
The COVID-19 pandemic is forcing universities to turn to
distance learning and online learning to continue education
delivery while controlling the spread of the virus. As
information technology evolves rapidly in most countries,
electronic learning (E-learning) is increasingly implemented
in higher education nowadays. The reason for preferring E-
learning nowadays is due to the pandemic of COVID-19
which limits the students from attending in-campus courses as
learning due to job commitment that do not permit them to
physically attend courses in the university campus. UNESCO
(2020) indicates that the closure of universities and schools
has several damaging effects on students, such as interrupted
learning that denies students’ learning growth and
development opportunities. Higher education institutions in
developing countries have used tools to promote and deliver
education through the use of ICT [1]. The transformation from
the conventional teaching and learning system to the use of
technologically powered resources is known as E-learning.
However, Islam and Azad [2] and Yakubu and Dasuki [3]
indicated that E-learning should not be regarded as a
replacement for conventional learning, but rather as a platform
for promoting and improving the learning environment. E-
learning tools lead to enhanced students’ access to learning
and teaching resources. E-Learning tools include Blackboard,
Moodle and Web 2.0 platforms [3,4]. Most previous studies
that examined the adoption of E-learning in higher education
were conducted in developed countries [2–5] and limited
studies have been conducted in higher education in developing
countries [6, 7] particularly in Iraq [8].
Due to the constraints and unique situation of developing
countries, the results from studies that analyzed the E-learning
adoption in the developed world can not necessarily be
generalized in the setting of a developing country. The limited
technology resource, awareness and low economic level in
developing countries [9] are among the factors that differ
developing countries from others. Despite that, most of the
prior findings agreed that the E-learning adoption was highly
impacted by behavioral intention and technology acceptance
[5–7]. Those studies concluded that E-learning technology
was not only a technical solution, but was often affected by
behavioral and social context. Technology in Iraq is suffering
from several challenges[10] such as inferior technology
infrastructure [11] and low awareness to implement the
technology in learning institutions [12]. These challenges
negatively impacted the adoption of E-learning in Iraqi
universities. However, the Iraqi universities nowadays are
forced to adopt E-learning at the universities due to COVID-
19 pandemic especially when students are not allowed to
attend classes physically.

978-1-7281-9169-0/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE 165

DOI 10.1109/AiCIS51645.2020.00035

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. Downloaded on April 28,2021 at 05:35:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Therefore, the aim of this study is to examine the impact
of selected determinants derived from UTAUT on behavioral
intention to use E-learning in the context of Iraqi higher
education.
II. LITERATURE REVIEW
A. E-learning
The delivery of educational content through digitally
activated devices such as personal computers, laptops and
smartphones can be represented as E-learning. E-learning
relies on the preference of a learner or student to employ
technology, expressed as behavioral intention in the literature
[20]. During the COVID-19 pandemic, E-learning
technologies have widely been used in universities. E-learning
during the COVID-19 pandemic plays an important role to
provide teaching and learning to a university student. E-
learning seeks to support teachers, colleges and universities
during the times of universities and schools’ closures to
provide student education. Nevertheless, the availability and
use of E-learning learning materials in many universities
during the COVID-19 pandemic is becoming a key challenge.
E-learning success highly depends on the level of acceptance
of students who should benefit from it [7]. Nevertheless, E-
learning in most developing countries is facing several
challenges [7] related to the quality of training [13], ICT
infrastructure [14], ICT policies [7], lack of awareness[15]
and resistance to change [7]. So need to enhance the IT
infrastructure to Continuous learning and innovative
communication strategies will help boost learning and
strengthen instructor-student interest and teamwork [7]. There
are effective strategies for presenting the online interface
content, which allow students to achieve higher levels of
learning and intellectual awareness [16].
B. Conceptual model and research hypotheses
The aim of this research is to examine BI to use E-learning
based on the perceptions of higher education students in Iraq.
Literature in all psychological, technical and sociological
fields suggests that the behavioral intention of people to
conduct or refrain from acting may be the strongest predictor
of a particular action [17,18] This conclusion was widely
verified by research in information systems [8,19].
E-learning implementation highly depends on the decision
of a user to use the technology expressed as behavioral
intention in the literature [20]. Based on proven results from
previous research, behavioral intention is a determinant of
actual behavior. Prior studies paid more attention to the factors
that lead to the intention to use instead of actual use.
Therefore, this research examines the perceptions of students
in Iraq and investigates their BI to use E-learning based on the
proposed UTAUT2 model. Figure 1 depicts the model of the
current study and label of hypotheses in the model.
C. UTAUT 2
UTAUT model is described as a comprehensive model
which include all the previous theories such as the theory of
reasoned action (TRA), the theory of planned behavior (TPB),
and technology acceptance model (TAM). UTAUT is
considered as one of the latest theories in information system
which was proposed by Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, and Davis
166
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. Downloaded on April 28,2021 at 05:35:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
[12]. UTAUT could be a superior model, because it explicitly
describes the variation in behavioral purpose in more detail
relative to other models in technology acceptance. UTAUT
has the capacity to expand knowledge about behavioral goals
and technical use in an educational environment [3], [22].
UTAUT consisted of four elements that are PE, EE, SI and
FC [21]. However, UTAUT has been extended by Venkatesh,
Thong, and Xu [23] and named UTAUT2. The extension
included three elements namely hedonic motivation, price
value and habit. There are limited studies that examined the
application of UTAUT and UTAUT2 models to explain
behavioral intention among students in Arab countries [24]
particularly Iraq [8]. In addition, UTAUT was criticized for
generating bias in multiple researches performed in few
countries and contexts [24]. Accordingly, Venkatesh et al.
[23] stressed the importance of testing UTAUT2 in various
cultures and settings to improve its applicability and
reliability, particularly considering varying factors that could
influence the implementation of a new information system
based on target users and technology.
1. Performance expectancy
Users would convince that applied technology boosted his
efficiency when work gains are achieved [23]. Similarly, in
order to consider E-learning as useful at universities, students
have to develop strong judgement about E-learning ability to
produce significant outcomes for their work. The degree to
which a person assumes that the use of the system will
improve working efficiency is usually the best predictor of
intention [25]. In education context, PE develops when
academic staff conclude that E-learning can help them
complete their tasks more efficiently and effectively [6].
Improved performance (with regard to saving time and effort)
promotes E-learning adoption [6]. PE was included in this
study to analyze students' assumptions about the possible
advantages of the use of E-learning. Several studies
highlighted the importance of PE on BI to use E-learning and
confirmed that PE positively impacted BI in higher education
system [5, 24, 26, 27].
H1: PE has positive and significant impact on BI to use
E-learning
2. Effort expectancy
EE occurs when an individual has trouble-free experience
with the selected technology [23], and the extent to which
system use is effort-free [25]. UTAUT was previously
investigated to study how students and professors accept E-
learning in educational contexts as well as how staff accept
technical E-learning in business environments [25]. EE is one
of the elements that motivate the intention to use E-learning
[6]. In support, EE is seen as an important determinant of BI
to use E-learning specifically in learning behavior [5].
In this study, the inclusion of EE is aimed at exploring
students' views on whether the process of learning through the
use of E-learning is effortless, thus predict their BI to use the
web-based learning program. the prior empirical studies did
not show strong agreement regarding the impact of EE on BI.
Several empirical studies confirmed that EE had positive
and significant impact on BI [6, 25]. The study conducted by
Tarhini et al. [24] among students at two universities in
England, confirmed the positive and significant impact of EE
on BI. On other hand, Mikalef, Pappas, and Giannakos [28]
reported that EE had insignificant impact on BI. Thongsri et
 al. [26] conducted a study among students in Thailand and
found insignificant impact of EE on BI. In further support,
Arain et al. [27] reported that EE failed to significantly impact
BI in the context of higher education in Pakistan.
H2: EE has positive and significant impact on BI to use
E-learning.
3. Social influence
SI is the level to which one person feels that the society in
which he \she works requires the technology to be used [23].
SI is the pressure of the social norm as described in the
interpretation of the group influence on the decision of an
person [25]. SI also refers to social pressures from the external
environment which influence individuals' perceptions, actions
and behavior [24].
The impact of SI was confirmed by Venkatesh et al. [21],
particularly in the early phase of SI adoption [29]. The direct
effect of SI on BI can be explained when individuals affected
other people's views and causing them to engage in such
actions even though they do not want to [24]. In contrast,
Venkatesh and Davis [29] indicated that the effect of SI
increased only in mandatory situation and decreased in a
voluntary condition.
Empirically, there are inconsistent results reported in
previous studies about the impact of SI on BI. On one hand,
SI was found to have a positive and significant impact on BI
among students from two universities in England [5] and
undergraduate and postgraduate students in 15 universities in
Sri Lanka [7]. Similar finding was also reported recently by
Shen, Ho, Ly, and Kuo [30]. On the other hand, SI was
reported to have insignificant impact on BI [6,25, 27, 28].
H3: SI has positive and significant impact on BI to use E-
learning
4. Facilitating Conditions
FC refers to the conviction of users that applied
technologies can be used with institutional support and
resources [23]. The key issue here is the idea of supportive
infrastructure, which represents how convenient a system can
be used [29]. FC would be determined by students'
understanding of how they could access the required tools and
support to increase the ease of use of E-learning services.
Technical support and services that support a system use are
typically grouped as FC. In response, the administrators at
universities must facilitate the provision of necessary
infrastructure (e.g. computers, Wi-Fi) for better support
services and easy accessibility to E-learning resources [6].
Empirically, FC had a positive and significant impact on
BI [6]. In parallel, Samsudeen and Mohamed [7] confirmed
the positive and significant impact of FC on BI among
postgraduate and undergraduate students from 15 Sri Lankan
state universities. Similarly, Shen et al. [30] reported that BI
was influenced by FC in the context of higher education.
Conversely, FC did not have a significant impact on BI among
students in a study conducted by Tarhini et al. [24]. Mohan,
Upadhyaya, and Pillai [31] also reported that FC had
insignificant impact on BI among students in an Indian private
university.
H4: FC has positive and significant impact on BI to use E-
learning
5. Hedonic motivation
167
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. Downloaded on April 28,2021 at 05:35:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
HM relates to students’ perception of the benefits of E-
learning when students are allowed to explore knowledge in
an online environment. HM is described as the pleasure of
using specific technology, and the use of technology is
obviously directly influenced by HM [23]. When a user is
comfortable and enjoy using certain technology, then he or she
has more tendency to continue using the technology [27].
E-learning courses that are competent, well-designed and
engaging would probably be seen by E-learners as useful [25].
Gunasinghe et al. [6] investigated the impact of HM on BI and
reported that HM had positive and significant impact on BI.
In the context of higher education, Tarhini et al. [24]
confirmed that BI positively impacted by HM. Several other
studies also verified the positive impact of HM on BI [24],
[27]. Nevertheless, HM had insignificant impact on BI in
studies performed by Gunasinghe et al. [6] and Fagan [4].
H5: HM has positive and significant impact on BI to use
E-learning
6. Price Value
PV pertains to a cost-benefit analysis. A student perceives
technologies as more valuable if their advantages are greater
in comparison with the cost. This argument seems to be valid
in a consumer setting in which PV refers to the cognitive
balance between the benefits perceived by a person and the
amount spent on using a technology [6]. Compared to the
organizational environment in which technology facilities
required are freely available, students are responsible for the
financial burden of using such systems [5]. The students tend
to accept E-learning when they realize that the benefits of
using this system is higher than its cost. PV has a positive and
significant impact on BI [25]. Meanwhile, students at two
universities in England perceived PV as insignificant to
impact their BI [5]. Similar finding was reported by El-Masri
and Tarhini [24] that PV did not impact BI significantly in a
study comprising students in Qatar and USA.
H6: PV has positive and significant impact on BI to use E-
learning
7. Habit
HA concerns with a person who unconsciously acted on
account of past experience [23]. HA represents experience,
but experience is not sufficient to shape a HA on its own [23].
HA is an essential indicator that can redirect end users'
intentions and has a significant effect on behavioral intention.
The routines set in a job can be critical in deciding future
activities with a view to achieving work-related goals and
engaging in work-related activities like E-learning [25].
Empirically, Mehta et al. [25] reported positive and
significant impact of HA on BI. Similar finding was reported
by Gunasinghe et al. [6]. In the context of higher education
Tarhini et al. [24] claimed that HA positively and significantly
impacted BI of students. Other study conducted in higher
education context in Qatar and USA also found that HA had
positive and significant impact on BI [24].
H7: HA has positive and significant impact on BI to use
E-learning.
 Table II. Demographic Description
Variable Label Number Percentage
Male 109 51%
Gender Female 104 49%
Total 213 100%
1st Year 24 11%
2nd Year 46 22%
Year of Study 3rd Year 79 37%
4th Year 64 30%
Total 213 100%
N=213

B. Measurement Model
The purpose of this step is to measure the model validity
Fig. 1: Model of Study and reliability. There are several indices that should be
examined in this step. First, the factor loading should exceed
the cut off level of 0.6 [35] and all the items loadings should
III. METHODOLOGY exceed the cut off level of 0.6. Based on Table 3, all items
The population of the study consisted of undergraduate except for EE4, SI2, HM1, HM2, PV1,3,4 showed acceptable
students of the Cihan University-Erbil, Iraq that use Moodle- and high loadings. The items with loadings less than 0.6 were
LMS. In this study, the target population is specified by removed to enhance the model fit. However,. these items are
Moodle users and purposive sampling has been adopted [32]. shown low loading may because not applicable for this
The population of the study is 5,226 students enrolled at Cihan context. The Composite Reliability (CR) and Cronbach alpha
University-Erbil, Iraq [33]. According to Krejcie and Morgan should be > 0.7 [35] and the purpose of this index is to find
[34], population closed to 5,225 required a sample size of 358. the internal consistency of each construct. The result as
The data were collected by using online questionnaire depicted in Table 3 showed that all the constructs had high
developed in Google form. The questionnaires were sent to reliability. Lastly, the average variance extracted (AVE)
undergraduate students via email and also a direct link to should be higher than 0.5 [35]. The AVE for all constructs
students’ social media platforms. 213 valid questionnaires exceeded the recommended level > 0.5 (see table 3) and
were eventually collected, indicating 59% response rate. Two (Figure 2).
software were used during the data analysis phase namely Table III. Validity and reliability
SPSS version 24.0 for preliminary analysis such as data entry, AVE
treatment for outlier and missing value, normality test and Construct Items Loading CR>0.7 Alpha
>0.5
descriptive analysis. Meanwhile for the main analysis, AMOS BI1 .653
version 24 as embedded in Structural Equation Model (SEM) Behavioral
BI2 .825
0.786 0.512
was deployed to examine the hypotheses. The research BI3 .824 0.896
Intention
instrument was adopted from prior studies and measured by BI4 .813
BI5 .726
using five-point Likert scale. The items for each variable and
the respective sources are summarized as follow: PE1 .854
Performance PE2 .901 0.910
TABLE I. instrument development 0.905 0.719
Expectancy PE3 .938
Construct No. Items Sources PE4 .671

BI 5 [7][21] EE1 .726

Effort
EE2 .879 0.818 0.533
PE 4 [7][21] Expectancy 0.810
EE3 .603
EE 5 [21], [23], [25] EE5 .682
SI1 .809
SI 5 [7][21] Social SI3 .830 0.899 0.684
0.915
FC 5 [7][21] Influence SI4 .832
SI5 .851
HM 4 [21], [23], [25] FC1 .839
HA 4 [21], [23], [25] Facilitating FC2 .854
0.766 0.654
Conditions FC3 .761 0.896
PV 6 [21], [23], [25] FC4 .815
FC5 .768
Hedonic
HM3 .986 0.856 0.752
Motivation 0.837
IV. Data Analysis HM4 .729

A. Demographic Description HA1 .976

Habit HA2 .970 0.943 0.806
The majority of respondents were male (51%) while 0.944
HA3 .898
female accounted for 49%. Besides, most respondents were HA4 .722
students from the 3rd year (37%) and 4th year (30%). 11% and PV2 .691
0.764 0.521
22% of the respondents were students from the 1st and 2nd Price Value PV5 .801 0.761
PV6 .666
year respectively (see Table 2).

168

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. Downloaded on April 28,2021 at 05:35:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

C. Model fit
All the model fit indices exceeded the cut off value. The
CFI .914, IFI .915, TLI .907, CMIN/DF 1.868 < 5.00,
exceeded the cut off value 0.9 [35]. RMSEA 0.064 <0.08 [35],
which reflected a good model fit. After ensuring the validity,
reliability and model fit the next step is to examine the
Structural Model.
the T-value 1.257 < 1.96. Thus, H3 was rejected. The fourth
hypothesis examined the impact of FC on BI to use E-learning
and the result showed that FC had positive and significant
impact on BI to use E-learning with p-value <0.05 and the T-
value 2.66 >1.96. Thus, H4 was accepted. H5 and H6 were
rejected since the p-value >0.05 and the T-value <1.96. This
means that HM and PV had insignificant impact on BI to use
E-learning. The last hypotheses indicated positive and
significant impact of students’ HA on BI to use E-learning
with p-value <0.05 and T-value >1.96. Thus, H7 was
accepted.

Fig. 3: Structural model

IV. Results of Hypotheses Testing

Hypotheses Path Beta P- Result

S.E. C.R.
Value

H1 BI<---PE .1412 .0526 2.684 .0072 Accepted

H2 BI<---EE .1730 .0674 2.564 .0103 Accepted

H3 BI<---SI .0715 .0569 1.257 .2087 Rejected

H4 BI<---FC .2244 .0841 2.665 .0076 Accepted

H5 BI<---HM .1276 .0838 1.521 .1280 Rejected

H6 BI<---PV .1871 .1666 1.123 .2613 Rejected

Fig.2: Measurement Model
H7 BI<---HA .1523 .0426 3.575 *** Accepted

D. Structural Model
The purpose of this step is to examine the seven
hypotheses developed from UTAUT2 theory. Figure 3
illustrates the seven independent variables and one dependent
variable. The results of the structural path analysis are
presented in Table 4.
The first hypothesis examined the impact of PE on BI and
the result indicated that the p-value <0.05 and the T-value
2.684 >1.96. Thus, H1 was accepted. Second hypothesis
showed that EE had positive and significant impact on BI with
p-value <0.05 and the T-value 2.564 >1.96. Thus, H2 was
accepted. The third hypothesis indicated that the SI had
insignificant impact on BI due to the p-value .2087 > 0.05 and
V. DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of PE,
EE, SI, FC, HM, PV and HA derived from UTAUT2 on BI to
use E-learning in context of Iraqi higher education. This study
confirmed the validity of UTAUT2 in the context of Iraq
particularly in higher education system.
The result indicates that PE is important to increase BI to
use E-learning and this result is in line with previous findings
[5], [24], [26], [27]. Student’s conviction in better
performance (time-saving) supports E-learning. Therefore, in
order to attract students to use E-learning, the academic staff
should enhance the content quality of their E-learning
programs, offer adequate up-to-date material which is capable

169

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. Downloaded on April 28,2021 at 05:35:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 of meeting the needs of students. Good performance of E-
learning helps the students to complete their tasks quickly and
enhance their learning performance as well as increase
students’ productivity. For that reason, students perceived
performance as important to accept E-learning.
The results also showed that the EE had positive impact on
BI to use E-learning among students and this factor plays
important role to enhance the E-learning use. This result
bolsters prior findings [6,25]. The findings of this study also
revealed that training technology-savvy students to use
technology is not necessary, however, it is essential for less
qualified students. Therefore, program designers should have
a framework to enhance the ease of use of E-learning to ensure
mass adoption among university students. The students prefer
E-learning system to be easily navigate, engaging and
understandable.
The results revealed that SI has insignificant impact on BI
to use E-learning among students, and this finding is
supported by earlier studies [6, 25,27, 28]. SI may not have an
influence on BI to use E-learning because the use of E-
learning system during the COVID-19 pandemic is
compulsory for students so that they could obtain learning
materials and keep in touch with their lecturers especially
when they are unable to go to the university physically.
FC at university have a positive and significant impact on
BI to use E-learning among students. This result is supported
by Gunasinghe et al. [6], and Samsudeen and Mohamed [7].
The FC increases the students’ willingness to use E-learning,
thus decision-makers at the university should enhance the
digital infrastructure such as Internet bandwidth and
installation of additional campus Wi-Fi access points.
Moreover, the university may collaborate with mobile
network providers to design a suitable offer of Internet data
packages for university students. This step may encourage the
student to involve and accept the E-learning even more.
HM does not impact the BI to use E-learning among
students. The result aligned with Fagan, [4] and Gunasinghe
et al.[6] . This result is rationally explained by the mandatory
use of the Moodle system only when directed by the course
instructors. Consequently, the students never had the chance
to use the E-learning based on hedonic basis.
PV has insignificant impact on students’ BI to use E-
learning. The result is consistent with the findings of El-Masri
and Tarhini [24] and Tarhini et al. [24] . This result reflects
the fact that the university provides the E-learning system
(Moodle system) free of charge for students.
HA has positive and significant impact on BI to use E-
learning, meaning that HA increases the acceptance to use E-
learning among university students. This result aligned with
studies conducted by Gunasinghe et al. [6] and Tarhini et al.
[24]. The habit of using and experiencing systems, the
perceived pleasure and facilities available seemed to be the
major drivers for E-learning adoption by students. When
Moodle system becomes one of the routines performed by
students, it will lead to higher tendency to use it. The use of
technology among students naturally leads to higher
technology acceptance rate and it is anticipated to be even
higher if students use E-learning technology more habitually.
170
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. Downloaded on April 28,2021 at 05:35:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
VI. IMPLICATIONS
The study will help policymakers at universities and
practitioners gain a deeper understanding of the factors
affecting students’ choices about Web-based learning
technologies and to develop corresponding strategies to
encourage student to use E-learning. The study is useful for
universities, teachers and educators, decision-makers at
universities and higher education system in designing and
implementing their online system, as well as in making
appropriate decisions to allow an increased number of
university students to embrace E-learning.
VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the UTAUT2 theory, this study examined the
determinants of BI to use E-learning from the students’
perspective in the context of Iraq. The theory was empirically
validated in the context of Iraqi higher education system by
examined seven hypotheses. In summary, four hypotheses
were essential to increase the BI of students to use the E-
learning. Future studies can expand this work to be conducted
in more than one university in both the public and private
sectors. Addition, could find the causal effect of this study by
using mediator role. The universities should pay more
attention to enhance the Management Learning system and
provide training courses to the academic staff and the students
to encourage them to be involved with the e-learning system.
However, developing the e-system at university and establish
the environment for it will lead to the successful
implementation of e-learning nowadays.
REFERENCES
[1] A. S. Jameel, M. A. Karem, and N. Z. Mahmood, “A Review of the
Impact of ICT on Business Firms,” Int. J. Latest Eng. Manag. Res., vol.
2, no. 1, pp. 15–19, 2017.
[2] A. K. M. N. Islam and N. Azad, “Satisfaction and continuance with a
learning management system,” Int. J. Inf. Learn. Technol., 2015.
[3] M. N. Yakubu and S. I. Dasuki, “Factors affecting the adoption of e-
learning technologies among higher education students in Nigeria: A
structural equation modelling approach,” Inf. Dev., vol. 35, no. 3, pp.
492–502, 2019.
[4] M. H. Fagan, “Factors Influencing Student Acceptance of Mobile
Learning in Higher Education,” Comput. Sch., vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 105 –
121, Apr. 2019.
[5] A. Tarhini, R. Masa’deh, K. A. Al-Busaidi, A. B. Mohammed, and M.
Maqableh, “Factors influencing students’ adoption of e-learning: a
structural equation modeling approach,” J. Int. Educ. Bus., vol. 10, no.
2, pp. 164–182, Nov. 2017.
[6] A. Gunasinghe, J. A. Hamid, A. Khatibi, and S. M. F. Azam, “The
adequacy of UTAUT-3 in interpreting academician’s adoption to e-
Learning in higher education environments,” Interact. Technol. Smart
Educ., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 86–106, Nov. 2019.
[7] S. N. Samsudeen and R. Mohamed, “University students’ intention to
use e-learning systems,” Interact. Technol. Smart Educ., vol. 16, no. 3,
pp. 219–238, Sep. 2019.
[8] A. Al-Azawei and A. Alowayr, “Predicting the intention to use and
hedonic motivation for mobile learning: A comparative study in two
Middle Eastern countries,” Technol. Soc., vol. 62, p. 101325, Aug.
2020.
[9] A. R. Ahmad, N. Keerio, A. S. Jameel, and M. A. Karem, “The
Relationship between National Culture and Succession Planning in
Malaysian Public Universities,” J. Educ. e-Learning Res., vol. 7, no. 3,
pp. 242–249, 2020.
[10] T. S. Mousa, A. S. Jameel, and A. R. Ahmad, “The Impact of Attitude
, Subjective Norm and Information Communications Technology on
Knowledge Sharing among Academic Staff,” Int. J. Psychosoc.
Rehabil., vol. 23, no. 02, pp. 704–717, 2019.
 [11] A. S. Jameel, “Issues Facing Citizens In Iraq Towards Adoption Of E- [35] J. F.Hair, W. C. Black, B. J.Babin, and R. E. Anderson, Multivariate
Government,” Al-Kitab J. Hum. Sci., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 195–203, 2018. Data Analysis, 7th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall., 2010.
[12] A. S. Jameel and M. Moshfeghyan, Factors Affecting E-Commerce By
E-Learning. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing,Germany, 2017.
[13] A. S. Jameel and A. R. Ahmad, “The Mediating Role of Job
Satisfaction between Leadership Style and Performance of Academic
Staff,” Int. J. Psychosoc. Rehabil., vol. 24, no. 04, pp. 2399–2414,
2020.
[14] A. S. Jameel and M. A. Ahmad, “Determine some factors that affect to
adoption of e-commerce among small and medium enterprises in
Erbil,” Polytech. J., vol. 8, no. 1, 2018.
[15] A. S. Jameel, “Challenges facing students toward ICT library
adoption,” in International Conference on Accounting, Business,
Economics and Politics, 2018, no. April, pp. 231–237.
[16] M. A. Karem, Y. N. Mahmood, A. S. Jameel, and A. R. Ahmad, “The
Effect of Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment on Nurses’
Performance,” Humanit. Soc. Sci. Rev., vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 332–339,
2019.
[17] F. D. Davis, “A technology acceptance model for empirically testing
new end-user information systems: Theory and results.” Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, 1985.
[18] I. Ajzen, M. Fishbein, and R. L. Heilbroner, Understanding attitudes
and predicting social behavior, vol. 278. Prentice-hall Englewood
Cliffs, NJ, 1980.
[19] S. Taylor and P. A. Todd, “Understanding information technology
usage: A test of competing models,” Inf. Syst. Res., vol. 6, no. 2, pp.
144–176, 1995.
[20] F. D. Davis, R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw, “User Acceptance of
Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models,”
Manage. Sci., vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 982–1003, Aug. 1989.
[21] V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, “User
acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” MIS
Q., pp. 425–478, 2003.
[22] E. T. Straub, “Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future
directions for informal learning,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 79, no. 2, pp.
625–649, 2009.
[23] V. Venkatesh, J. Y. L. Thong, and X. Xu, “Consumer acceptance and
use of information technology: extending the unified theory of
acceptance and use of technology,” MIS Q., pp. 157–178, 2012.
[24] M. El-Masri and A. Tarhini, “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., vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 743–763, Jun. 2017.
[25] A. Mehta, N. P. Morris, B. Swinnerton, and M. Homer, “The Influence
of Values on E-learning Adoption,” Comput. Educ., vol. 141, p.
103617, Nov. 2019.
[26] N. Thongsri, L. Shen, and Y. Bao, “Investigating factors affecting
learner’s perception toward online learning: evidence from ClassStart
application in Thailand,” Behav. Inf. Technol., vol. 38, no. 12, pp.
1243–1258, Dec. 2019.
[27] A. A. Arain, Z. Hussain, W. H. Rizvi, and M. S. Vighio, “Extending
UTAUT2 toward acceptance of mobile learning in the context of higher
education,” Univers. Access Inf. Soc., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 659–673, Aug.
2019.
[28] P. Mikalef, I. O. Pappas, and M. Giannakos, “An integrative adoption
model of video-based learning,” Int. J. Inf. Learn. Technol., vol. 33, no.
4, pp. 219–235, Aug. 2016.
[29] V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis, “A Theoretical Extension of the
Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies,”
Manage. Sci., vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186–204, Feb. 2000.
[30] C. Shen, J. Ho, P. T. M. Ly, and T. Kuo, “Behavioural intentions of
using virtual reality in learning: perspectives of acceptance of
information technology and learning style,” Virtual Real., vol. 23, no.
3, pp. 313–324, Sep. 2019.
[31] M. M. Mohan, P. Upadhyaya, and K. R. Pillai, “Intention and barriers
to use MOOCs: An investigation among the post graduate students in
India,” Educ. Inf. Technol., May 2020.
[32] M. Saunders, P. Lewis, and A. Thornhill, Research methods for
business students. Pearson education, 2009.
[33] Cihan university-Erbil, “Cihan university-Erbil,” 2020. [Online].
Available: https://cihanuniversity.edu.iq/en/home-university/.
[34] R. V. Krejcie and D. W. Morgan, “KrejcieandMorgan_article.pdf.”
1970.

171

Authorized licensed use limited to: Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia. Downloaded on April 28,2021 at 05:35:45 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
View publication stats