Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Technology readiness and acceptance model as a factor for the use

intention of LMS e-Learning in Kuningan University
To cite this article: Fahmi Yusuf et al 2021 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1933 012005

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 178.173.241.39 on 19/06/2021 at 05:00

Virtual Conference on Engineering, Science and Technology (ViCEST) 2020 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1933 (2021) 012005 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1933/1/012005

Technology readiness and acceptance model as a factor for the use

intention of LMS e-Learning in Kuningan University

Fahmi Yusuf*, Nita Mirantika, Tri Septiar Syamfithriani, Erlan Darmawan,

and Dede Irawan
Universitas Kuningan, Kuningan, Indonesia

*fahmionline@uniku.ac.id

Abstract. Covid 19 pandemic influences business, office activities, and education. It makes all
activities are in not in normal activities as we used to do. Now we count on Information
Technology to live in this pandemic era. Now to deal with it, we do Teaching and Learning
activities in online mode. Not all students are used to learning in online mode. We deal with
many kinds of problems in doing Teaching and Learning in Online mode. This research is to
find out factors that influences the user’s intention to use Online Learning or E-Learning based
on Learning Management System (LMS). Factors used in this research are taken from
Technology Readiness from Parasuraman combined with Technology Acceptance Method
Model (TAM). Based on the evaluation result, we can conclude that Optimism variable,
usefulness perception and ease of use perception in the technology. LMS has very important
role in building the positive perception in LMS technology. this motivated the users to use the
LMS technology. This research is done with Kuningan University students as our respondents
during this pandemic time. This research contributed to previous theory about technology
readiness and acceptance method in teaching and learning activity.

1. Introduction
Covid 19 pandemic has caused many problems to many sector, including Education activities.
Indonesian Government through Education and Culture Ministry released leaflet No. 4 year 2020
about Education Policy in Covid 19 Pandemic. They informed all Teaching and Learning activities
must be done online. This is a new thing for Indonesian education system, in the university level, we
assume that it is a new way of teaching and learning activity. Based on data given bb medcom.id in
2019 there are 15 Univerties which has E Learning program in the form of Distant Learning. This
Distant Learning is approved by Education Ministry. Education Ministry had released Distant
Learning Program since 2012 in Undang – Undang No. 24 year 2012. This is one of reasons we do our
research to see the Students’ readiness and the lecturers of Kuningan University to do Online Teaching
and Learning activities.
By information and communication technology development, there are so many teaching and
learning application in many platforms that improve and spread widely for daily use and for many
purposes. This is why Information Technology development is very important. [1] The Purpose of
Information technology is to contribute to significant teaching learning activity directly, we called this
e-learning model. [2] That e-learning in general is defined as Information Technology use in teaching
and learning process. That’s why there are so many Universities in Indonesia and in the world start to
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
Virtual Conference on Engineering, Science and Technology (ViCEST) 2020 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1933 (2021) 012005 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1933/1/012005

revise their strategies to adopt technology to help them accomplish their Pedagogic Goals. Those are
the reasons the writers to see the readiness to adopt the technology especially in Education world. The
success of Web Teaching based will not accomplished if the students fail to use the system [3]. The
Writers’ experience in using e-learning as a tool for traditional class (blended learning), there are some
unwillingness and difficulties showed by the Student and lecturers. The writers are motivated by this
condition to figure out why there are such unwillingness and difficulties among the Students and the
lecturers.
One of IT tools categorized in the Education sector is called Learning Management System (LMS).
LMS is one of technology in the form of software which develops so fast and used in many
universities, in the form of open source like Moodle or LMS for commercial such as Blackboard [4].
Nowadays There is LMS for free for example by using Google Classroom. [5] That availability of
LMS is an important factor for the success of e-learning. LMS use many systems to help teachers and
students to access Online Learning service [5]. The service available by LMS that varied from one
system to another system. Access control, Management Performance, Communication Facility,
Grading, Teaching Schedule document and Teaching and Learning contents availability are included
in LMS [6]. The report nowadays showed that more than 95 % of all university and college response
in US had adopted one or more LMS [7]. The same level is in the Universities in England [8] Based
on the writer’s observation the use of LMS development in Universities in Indonesia are almost the
same level as in other countries.
LMS the effective of LMS implementation has to considerate LMS users such as Lecturer and
University students who use the system in teaching and learning process. That’s why the purpose of
this research is to develop Theoretical Framework based on technology readiness [8] and Technology
Acceptance [9]. The model suggested by the Writer contributed to many research about e-learning in
Indonesia and will be used to measure the index of technology readiness and to measure the influence
of LMS to Users’ attitude in using LMS. [10].

2. Methodology
2.1 Research Model
The research Model is TRAM model which is the approach of collaboration of technology readiness
dimension in general (TRI) and The measurement of Usage and easiness technology usage (TAM)
[10] [11]. TRI dimension has for variables that consists of two variable of user’s positive perception to
technology, optimism and innovativeness and two variable of user’s negative perceptions to
technology such as discomfort and insecurity. While TAM dimension has 3 variables such as
perceived usefulness, perceive ease of use and intention to use.

2.2 Research Design

This research uses Quantitative Method, to explain the phenomena uses numeric data, the analyze the
data using statistic [12]. The Quantitative Research method done by the writers is a survey method in
large or small population, but the data studied are the data ONLY taken from those population, to find
relative activities, distribution and relations among sociological and psychological variables [13].

2.3 Research Instrument

The research instrument used by the writer is questionnaire. The questionnaire is a data collection
which is done by giving written questions or statement for respondents to answer [14]. The research
questionnaire consists of 4 TRI variables with 36 indicators adapted from research instrument which is
done [15] and TAM variables with 12 indicators which adapted from the research instrument which
had been done [9]. The adaptations are done to adapt all of those research instruments with the
instruments done by the writers. The questionnaire is arranged based on Likert scale 5 level developed
by Resins Likert [16]. The Likert Scale is a scale research that is often used to measure attitude and
opinion. Based on the Likert Scale, respondents will fill the questionnaire by telling their agreement to
the questions stated in the questionnaire. The Likert scale used by the writers is the 5 level of Likert

2
Virtual Conference on Engineering, Science and Technology (ViCEST) 2020 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1933 (2021) 012005 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1933/1/012005

Scale with neutral label in third position. Every response item will be presented by “Strongly
Disagree” for number 1 until “Strongly Disagree” in number 5. The rating of Likert Scale used in this
research will be shown in figure 1.

Figure 1. Likert Scale

The population in this research is all UNIKU students as LMS Users as many as 5.192 and spread
in six faculties. The calculation of Sample number used in this research is Slovin formula introduced
by Slovin in 1960. The Slovin formula is stated in this formula.

(1)

Proportional Level in this research based on the student’s amount number percentage at each faculty in
Kuningan University. The tabulation and analysis data tool used in this research is Structural Equation
Modeling (SEM) by using Smart PLS 3.0 application. By analyzing SEM-PLS, the writers can test the
relationship between recursive or non-recursive complex variables to get comprehensive picture of the
model and can examine model measurement / Outer Model and structural model / Inner Model
together [14].

3. Result and Discussion

3.1 Respondent Description
The research respondent are all Kuningan University students using LMS with the sample total 371
students. The questionnaire is done online using google form application. The respondents based on
Gender, 60% female and 40 % male. This indicates more female students use LMS than male students.
This distribution is made proportional as seen from the percentage of the student number in each
faculty. The Economy Faculty has the highest percentage as 41 %. This means the number of
Economy Faculty students is the most in number in Kuningan University. Followed by Teaching
Faculty as 26 %, 4 % for Forestry Faculty, 4 % for Law Faculty and 3 % for Magister program.

3.2 Evaluation of measurement models (Outer Model)

The evaluation measurement model (outer model) in this research is done to measure validity and
reliability of the instruments. To measure Convergent Validity test can be seen from Loading factor
value for each construct indicators. Rule of Thumb to measure Convergent Validity is Loading factor
has to be higher and 0,7 and the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) value has to be higher than 0,5.
The result of the measurement of Loading Factor value in each Construct indicator has a value more
than 0.70. then the result has fulfilled the Convergent Validity, means that every indicator can explain
each variable. The result is achieved by some improvement.
The improvement is by omitting indicators that have value less than 0,70 whereas AVE value for
each variable has value more than 0,50. Based on that information the result has met a demand of
convergent validity. the Square root value AVE for each variable has higher value than correlation
value between one variable to another variable. It means all variable in the model has met
Discriminant Validity criteria. Beside the Validity test, we did Variable realiabity test measured by
two criteria’s, composite reliability and Cronbach’s alpha. we got composite reliability data value
which have value higher than 0,70. For Cronbach’s Alpha, we got value higher than 0,60. This means
all variables in our research had good reliability. To evaluate outer model based on the Convergent
Validity test, Discriminant validity test and Reliability test, we can conclude that all variable in this
research model is valid and reliable.
3.3 Evaluation Model Structural (Inner Model)

3
Virtual Conference on Engineering, Science and Technology (ViCEST) 2020 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1933 (2021) 012005 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1933/1/012005

Evaluation for Inner Model is done to determine the relation between Latent variable in the research
model. For Significance test by calculating T value from coefficient path in significance level (alpha)
0,05 with two tailed test. T value is used to test hypothesis that is proposed in this research. The
perceived of usefulness has 0,455 value, this means endogen PU variable can be explained by Exogen
Optimism variable, Innovativeness, discomfort and insecurity as 45,5 % and 54,5 % is explained by
other variables that exclude in this research. Besides that, 0,455 % value show moderate influence
from hexogen variable to perceived of Usefulness variables.
Perceived Ease of usefulness (PEU) has 0,368 value means that PEU endogen variable can be
explained by hexogen variables such as Optimism, Innovativeness, Discomfort and Insecurity 36,8%.
There is 63,2% value that is explained by other variables which are exclude in the research. Beside
that the 0,368 showed a weak influence from exogen variable to perceived Ease of Usefulness (PEU).
Intention to Use (IU) had 0,583 value that means Endogen IU variable can be explained by Exogen PU
and PEU variables as 58,3 % whereas 41,7 % is explained by other variables exclude from the
research. 0,583 showed moderate influence from exogen variable to intention of Use (IU). the
optimism (OPT) to Perceived of Usefulness (PU) has T-value 1,993 >1,96, P-value <0,05 and path
coefficient value is positive. This means Significance and hypotheses is accepted. Optimism factor
influenced positively to Perceived of Usefulness. This result is suitable to the result of the research
done [11] that is optimism factor had positive impact to perceived of usefulness. If the technology
users have high optimism, then they will see that technology give many advantages for daily life.
Students of UNIKU have high optimism in using LMS so that they feel and LMS give many
advantages and also help their learning activities.
Optimism (OPT) to ward Perceived Ease of Usefulness (PEU) had T-value 4,399 > 1,96, P-value
<0,05 and Path coefficient values is positive. This means Significance and hypotheses is accepted.
Optimism factor has positive influence toward Perceived of Ease of Usefulness. This result is the same
with the result of previous research which had done by [11], the users toward perceived ease of
usefulness will believe more to technology they use. UNIKU student have high optimism in using
LMS so that the students feel that LMS give ease in learning activities and they also can contribute in
learning activities. Innovativeness (INV) toward Perceived of Usefulness (PU) have T-Value 1,504 <
1,96, P-value > 0,05 and the path coefficient value is positive. This means The research is not
significant and hypotheses is rejected. Innovativeness is not influence the perceived ease of usefulness.
This result is the same as the result of previous research that had been done by [11] that is the
respondents with high innovativeness will be more critical and they can find with advantages and
disadvantages technology. UNIKU students can think innovatively and more critical toward the
perceived ease of usefulness of LMS. This means that LMS had lack of Usefulness for teaching and
learning process. Innovativeness (INV) toward Perceived Ease of Usefulness (PEU) had T-Value
7,323 > 1, 96, P-value < 0,05 and positive Path coefficient value. This means the research is
significant and the hypotheses is accepted. Innovative factor has positive influence toward perceive
ease of usefulness. This result has the same result as [17]. the high individual’s innovative level will
support adoption level of a technology. Respondent with high innovativeness will be more critical so
that they will find out and feel which technology will be easier to use and which one is more difficult
to use. UNIKU students had high innovation in using LMS and they feel LMS give more ease in
learning process.
Discomfort toward Perceived of Usefulness (PU) has T-Value 0,742 < 1,96, P – value > 0,05 and
negative path value coefficient. This means the result of the research is no Significant and hypotheses
is rejected. Discomfort factor is not influence the Perceived of Usefulness. Because of The learning
demand, the respondents are still use the LMS. The respondent who constantly use the technology will
feel the usefulness of the technology even though they are uncomfortable with the technology. This
result supports the previous research that had been done by [18] that says the discomfort will not
influence usefulness factor. Discomfort (DIS) toward Perceived Ease of Usefulness (PEU) had T-
value 1,870 < 1,96, P-value >0,05 and positive path coefficient value.

4
Virtual Conference on Engineering, Science and Technology (ViCEST) 2020 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1933 (2021) 012005 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1933/1/012005

This means The result of the research is not significant and the hypotheses is rejected. The
discomfort factor is not influence the perceived Ease of Usefulness. The uncomfortable respondent
still used the technology because they need the LMS and also because of the demand of the leaning
process. Insecurity (INS) toward Perceived of Usefulness had T-value 4,609 > 1,96, P-value < 0,05
and positive path coefficient value. This means that the result of the research is significant but with the
positive of the path coefficient so that the Insecurity factor will positively influence the perceived Ease
of Usefulness so that the test result will be so contrast with the hypotheses proposed by the writers.
The result showed reversed phenomena from the previous result that had been done by [11] and [19]
that said Discomfort variable had negative toward Perceived Ease of Usefulness of technology. This
could happen because there were demands in teaching and learning process, so that the respondents
still used the LMS. When the respondents used the technology constantly they got the perceived ease
of Usefulness of technology even though the respondents were feeling discomfort.
Insecurity (INS) toward the perceived Ease of Usefulness (PEU) has T- value 1,493<1,96, P-
value > 0,05 and positive path coefficient value. This means the result of the research is not significant
and the hypotheses is rejected. Insecurity factor did not influence the perceived ease of usefulness. The
respondent who felt insecure could feel the ease of using the technology because of some reasons such
as the familiar technology used or the demand of the teaching and learning process. This result is the
same as the research result [20] that said respondents who have perception that technology is insecure
to use did not think that the technology is hard to use.
Perceived Ease of Usefulness (PEU) toward Perceived of Usefulness (PU) had T-value 8,792 >
1,96, P-value < 0,05 and positive path coefficient value. This means the result of the test is significant
and the hypotheses is accepted. Perceived Ease of Usefulness had positive influence toward Perceived
of Usefulness. Respondents who were easy to use LMS technology would feel some advantages from
the use of LMS technology. This result is the same as previous research that had been done [11] and
[18]. Perceived of Usefulness toward intention to use (IU) had T-value 11,94>1,96, P-value < 0,05 and
positive path coefficient value. This meant that the result of the research is significant and the
hypotheses is accepted. Perceived of Usefulness had positive influence toward Intention to Use (IU) to
the technology.
The respondents who get the advantages ot the LMS technology will continuously use the LMS
technology. This result is the same as Previous research that had been done [9] . Perceived Ease of
Usefulness (PEU) toward Intention of Use (IU) had T-Value 7,413 > 1,96, P-Value < 0,05 and
positive path coefficient value. This means that th result of the research is significant and the
hypotheses is accepted. Perceived ease of Use (PEU) had positive influence toward Intention to use
the technology. The respondents who got the ease to use the LMS technology from its content or the
process will use the LMS technology continuously. The result is the same as the research result from
Davis [9]

4. Conclusion
The model used in this research has fulfilled the Outer Model that consist of convergent and
discriminant Validity Test and also reliability test. This mean that instruments used in this research are
valid and reliable. The instruments were appropriate and capable to reveal the real information in the
field. The inner model to determine the relation between the latent variables in the research model, the
writers got information that optimism of LMS Users had positive influence toward perceived of ease.
The innovation level of LMS users had no influence toward the perceived Ease of Usefulness.
Insecurity level of LMS users had no influence toward Perceived Ease of Usefulness nor Perceived of
ease. The discomfort level of LMS users had no influence toward perceived of ease but had positive
influence toward the perceived ease of usefulness.
This information is contrasted and contradicted toward the hypotheses proposed by the writers.
The perceived of ease had positive influence toward perceived ease of usefulness. Perceived ease of
usefulness and perceived of ease had positive influence toward intention to use the LMS technology.

5
Virtual Conference on Engineering, Science and Technology (ViCEST) 2020 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1933 (2021) 012005 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1933/1/012005

Based on the evaluation above, we can conclude that the optimism variable, perceived ease of
usefulness and perceived of ease toward LMS technology had the biggest roles in building users’
positive perception to LMS technology. This will push the users to use the LMS technology.
The recommendation to improve the number of UNIKU students to use LMS technology is by
increasing students’ optimistic and innovative attitude by giving information’s about LMS technology
to the students. Beside that by increasing Perceived ease of usefulness and perceived of ease to the
LMS technology by adding contents and futures in the LMS application which make the students easy
to use the technology. If the students’ perception about the ease and the advantages about LMS
technology is creasing, the students will have more intention to use and to accept the LMS technology.
This will reduce negative opinion about discomfort and insecurity toward LMS technology. The
tabulation and analyzation data tools used in this research is Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) by
using SmartPLS 3.0 application. For further research we can use other methods so that we can have
result to compare with the result in this research.

References

[1] D. Radeliffe (2002). Technological and Pedagogical Convergence between Work-based and
Campus-based Learning. Educational Technology & Society 5(2) 2002 ISSN 1436-4522
[2] S Naidu (2003). Desiging Instruction for E-learning Enviroments. The University of
Melbourne Australia.
[3] MC Farland & Hamilton, 2006, Pituch & Lee, 2006. Adding contextual specificity to the
technology acceptance model. Computers in Human Behavior 22 (2006) 427–447
[4] Al-Busaidi, K. A., & Al-Shihi, H. (2010). Instructors' Acceptance of Learning Management
Systems: A Theoretical Framework, IBIMA Publishing Communications of the IBIMA, pp. 1-
10.
[5] Paulsen (2003). Experiences with Learning Management Systems in 113 European Institutions.
Educational Technology & Society, 6 (4), 134-148.
[6] N. Cavus and A, a M. Momani, 2009. Computer aided evaluation of learning management
systems. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 1 (2009) 426–430.
[7] Arroway, P., Davenport, E., Guanging, X., & Updegrove, D. (2010). EDUCAUSE core data
service fiscal year 2009 summary report.
[8] T. Browne et al, 2006. A Longitudinal Perspective Regarding the Use of VLEs by Higher
Education Institutions in the United Kingdom. Interactive Learning Environments. 24 August
2007.
[9] F.D Davis, 1989. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of
Information Technology. Management Information Systems Research Center, University of
Minnesota. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3 (Sep., 1989), pp. 319-340.
[10] Lin, Chien-Hsin., Shih, and Sher, Peter J. 2007. Integrating Technology Readiness into
Technology Acceptance: The TRAM Model. Psychology and Marketing, vol. 24
[11] Walczuch, R., J, Lemmink, and S, Streukens. 2007. The Effect of Service Employees
Technology Readiness on Technology Acceptance. Information & Management, vol 44.
[12] Muijs, Daniel. 2004. Doing Quantitative Research in Education. London: SAGE Publications
Ltd.
[13] Sugiyono. 2018. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif. Bandung: Alfabeta
[14] Ghozali, imam dan Hengky Latan. 2015. Partial Least Squares Konsep, Teknik dan Aplikasi
Menggunakan Program SmartPLS 3.0 Edisi 2. Semarang: Badan Penerbit –Undip
[15] Parasuraman, A. 2000. Technology Readiness Index (TRI) a Multiple-item Scale to Measure
Readiness to Embrance New Technologies. Journal of Service Reasearch, 2(4).
[16] Likert, R. (1931). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology,
22(140), 1-55.
[17] Yi et al. 2006. Understanding Information Technology Acceptance by Individual Professional:

6
Virtual Conference on Engineering, Science and Technology (ViCEST) 2020 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1933 (2021) 012005 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1933/1/012005

toward an Integrative View. Information & Management, vol. 43

[18] Godoe, P. And T.S. Johansen. 2012. Understanding Adoption of New Technology:
Recahnology Readiness and Technology Acceptance as an Integrated Concept. J. Eur. Psychol.
Students, vol 3
[19] Ling, L.M., and Moi, C.M. 2007. Professional Students Technology Readiness, Prior
Computing Experience and Acceptance of an E-Learning System. Malaysian Accounting
Review, 6(1).
[20] Hannah R., Himawat A., Admaja D. 2018. Analisis Penerimaan Teknologi Cloud Storage
Menggunakan Technology Readiness Acceptance Model (TRAM) pada Badan Eksekutif
Mahasiswa ITS. Jurnal Pengembangan Teknologi Informasi dan Ilmu Komputer, vol. 2