IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v10y2023i1d10.1057_s41599-023-01904-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adoption of blended learning: Chinese university students’ perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Teng Yu

    (School of Digital Economy Industry, Guangzhou College of Commerce
    Universiti Sains Malaysia)

  • Jian Dai

    (Zhejiang University of Technology
    Zhejiang University of Technology)

  • Chengliang Wang

    (Zhejiang University of Technology
    Faculty of Education, East China Normal University)

Abstract

Against the backdrop of the deep integration of the Internet with learning, blended learning offers the advantages of combining online and face-to-face learning to enrich the learning experience and improve knowledge management. Therefore, the objective of this present study is twofold: a. to fill a gap in the literature regarding the adoption of blended learning in the post-pandemic era and the roles of both the technology acceptance model (TAM) and the theory of planned behavior (TPB) in this context and b. to investigate the factors influencing behavioral intention to adopt blended learning. For that purpose, the research formulates six hypotheses, incorporates them into the proposed conceptual model, and validates them using model-fit indices. Based on data collected from Chinese university students, the predicted model’s reliability and validity are evaluated using structural equation modeling (SEM). The results of SEM show that (a) the integrated model based on the TAM and the TPB can explain 67.6% of the variance in Chinese university students’ adoption of blended learning; (b) perceived usefulness (PU), perceived ease of use (PEU), and subjective norms (SN) all have positive impacts on learning attitudes (LA); (c) PEU has a positive influence on PU, and SN has a positive influence on perceived behavioral control (PBC); and (d) both PU and LA have a positive influence on the intention to adopt blended learning (IABL). However, PEU, SN, and PBC have little effect on IABL; e. LA mediates the effect of PU on IABL, and PU mediates the effect of PEU on IABL. This study demonstrated that an integrated conceptual framework based on the TAM and the TPB as well as the characteristics of blended learning offers an effective way to understand Chinese university students’ adoption of blended learning.

Suggested Citation

  • Teng Yu & Jian Dai & Chengliang Wang, 2023. "Adoption of blended learning: Chinese university students’ perspectives," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:10:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-01904-7
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-023-01904-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-023-01904-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-023-01904-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Detmar Straub & Moez Limayem & Elena Karahanna-Evaristo, 1995. "Measuring System Usage: Implications for IS Theory Testing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(8), pages 1328-1342, August.
    2. Silvana Dakduk & Zuleima Santalla-Banderali & David van der Woude, 2018. "Acceptance of Blended Learning in Executive Education," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(3), pages 21582440188, September.
    3. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    4. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    5. Kumar Shalender & Naman Sharma, 2021. "Using extended theory of planned behaviour (TPB) to predict adoption intention of electric vehicles in India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 665-681, January.
    6. Cheng, Peng & OuYang, Zhe & Liu, Yang, 2019. "Understanding bike sharing use over time by employing extended technology continuance theory," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 433-443.
    7. Kamal, Syeda Ayesha & Shafiq, Muhammad & Kakria, Priyanka, 2020. "Investigating acceptance of telemedicine services through an extended technology acceptance model (TAM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    8. Sijing Zhou & Yu Zhou & Huiling Zhu, 2021. "Predicting Chinese University Students’ E-Learning Acceptance and Self-Regulation in Online English Courses: Evidence From Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) During COVID-19," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    9. Sreen, Naman & Purbey, Shankar & Sadarangani, Pradip, 2018. "Impact of culture, behavior and gender on green purchase intention," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 177-189.
    10. Wunong Zhang & Yuxin Wang & Lili Yang & Chuanyi Wang, 2020. "Suspending Classes Without Stopping Learning: China’s Education Emergency Management Policy in the COVID-19 Outbreak," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-6, March.
    11. Jaiswal, Deepak & Kaushal, Vikrant & Kant, Rishi & Kumar Singh, Pankaj, 2021. "Consumer adoption intention for electric vehicles: Insights and evidence from Indian sustainable transportation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    12. Iuliana Mihaela Lazar & Georgeta Panisoara & Ion Ovidiu Panisoara, 2020. "Digital technology adoption scale in the blended learning context in higher education: Development, validation and testing of a specific tool," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-27, July.
    13. Huashan Wu & Shujuan Luo, 2022. "Integrating MOOCs in an Undergraduate English Course: Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of Blended Learning," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, April.
    14. Daniela Popa & Angela Repanovici & Daciana Lupu & Mariana Norel & Claudiu Coman, 2020. "Using Mixed Methods to Understand Teaching and Learning in COVID 19 Times," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-20, October.
    15. Zaremohzzabieh, Zeinab & Ahrari, Seyedali & Krauss, Steven Eric & Samah, Asnarulkhadi Abu & Meng, Lee Kwan & Ariffin, Zaifunizam, 2019. "Predicting social entrepreneurial intention: A meta-analytic path analysis based on the theory of planned behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 264-276.
    16. Nhung Hendy & Nathalie Montargot, 2019. "Understanding Academic dishonesty among business school students in France using the theory of planned behavior," Post-Print hal-02633639, HAL.
    17. Shang-Yu Chen & Chung-Cheng Lu, 2016. "A Model of Green Acceptance and Intentions to Use Bike-Sharing: YouBike Users in Taiwan," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 1103-1124, December.
    18. Marco Bardus & May A. Massoud, 2022. "Predicting the Intention to Sort Waste at Home in Rural Communities in Lebanon: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-18, July.
    19. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    20. Sujeet Kumar Sharma, 2019. "Integrating cognitive antecedents into TAM to explain mobile banking behavioral intention: A SEM-neural network modeling," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 815-827, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Teng Yu & Yajun Zhang & Ai Ping Teoh & Anchao Wang & Chengliang Wang, 2023. "Factors Influencing University Students’ Behavioral Intention to Use Electric Car-Sharing Services in Guangzhou, China," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, November.
    2. Yuhui Jing & Xiaojiao Chen & Keke Zhu & Shusheng Shen & Chengliang Wang, 2023. "The Implementation Path and Problems Encountered During Emergency Remote Teaching in Vocational Colleges: A Qualitative Study in China," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, November.
    3. Yanqing Xia & Yili Deng & Xuanyu Tao & Sainan Zhang & Chengliang Wang, 2024. "Digital art exhibitions and psychological well-being in Chinese Generation Z: An analysis based on the S-O-R framework," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Yukun Hou & Zhonggen Yu, 2023. "The unified theory of acceptance and use of DingTalk for educational purposes in China: an extended structural equation model," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Chengliang Wang & Xiaojiao Chen & Teng Yu & Yidan Liu & Yuhui Jing, 2024. "Education reform and change driven by digital technology: a bibliometric study from a global perspective," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-17, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sarv Devaraj & Ming Fan & Rajiv Kohli, 2002. "Antecedents of B2C Channel Satisfaction and Preference: Validating e-Commerce Metrics," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 316-333, September.
    2. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    3. Sun, Ka Kit & He, Sylvia Y. & Thøgersen, John, 2022. "The purchase intention of electric vehicles in Hong Kong, a high-density Asian context, and main differences from a Nordic context," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 98-112.
    4. Christopher R. Plouffe & John S. Hulland & Mark Vandenbosch, 2001. "Research Report: Richness Versus Parsimony in Modeling Technology Adoption Decisions—Understanding Merchant Adoption of a Smart Card-Based Payment System," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(2), pages 208-222, June.
    5. Sung S. Kim & Naresh K. Malhotra, 2005. "A Longitudinal Model of Continued IS Use: An Integrative View of Four Mechanisms Underlying Postadoption Phenomena," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 741-755, May.
    6. Jaiswal, Deepak & Deshmukh, Arun Kumar & Thaichon, Park, 2022. "Who will adopt electric vehicles? Segmenting and exemplifying potential buyer heterogeneity and forthcoming research," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    7. Liyuan Liu & Yen Hsu, 2022. "Motivating factors behind the public’s use of smart recycling systems: perceived playfulness and environmental concern," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Rajak, Manindra & Shaw, Krishnendu, 2021. "An extension of technology acceptance model for mHealth user adoption," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    9. Susan A. Brown & Viswanath Venkatesh & Sandeep Goyal, 2012. "Expectation Confirmation in Technology Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(2), pages 474-487, June.
    10. Shahidi, Niousha & Tossan, Vesselina & Bourliataux-Lajoinie, Stéphane & Cacho-Elizondo, Silvia, 2022. "Behavioural intention to use a contact tracing application: The case of StopCovid in France," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    11. Mäntymäki, Matti & Salo, Jari, 2013. "Purchasing behavior in social virtual worlds: An examination of Habbo Hotel," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 282-290.
    12. Joan Torrent-Sellens & Cristian Salazar-Concha & Pilar Ficapal-Cusí & Francesc Saigí-Rubió, 2021. "Using Digital Platforms to Promote Blood Donation: Motivational and Preliminary Evidence from Latin America and Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-17, April.
    13. Sanjeev Verma, 2015. "Harnessing the Benefit of Social Networking Sites for Intentional Social Action: Determinants and Challenges," Vision, , vol. 19(2), pages 104-111, June.
    14. Muhammad Ali & Syed Ali Raza & Chin-Hong Puah & Mohd Zaini Abd Karim, 2017. "Islamic home financing in Pakistan: a SEM-based approach using modified TPB model," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(8), pages 1156-1177, November.
    15. Bierstaker, James & Janvrin, Diane & Lowe, D. Jordan, 2014. "What factors influence auditors' use of computer-assisted audit techniques?," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 67-74.
    16. Morteza Ghobakhloo & Masood Fathi, 2019. "Modeling the Success of Application-Based Mobile Banking," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-21, November.
    17. Chua Chang Jin & Lim Chee Seong & Aye Aye Khin, 2019. "Factors Affecting the Consumer Acceptance towards Fintech Products and Services in Malaysia," International Journal of Asian Social Science, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 9(1), pages 59-65, January.
    18. Hongping Yuan & Yu Yang & Xiaolong Xue, 2019. "Promoting Owners’ BIM Adoption Behaviors to Achieve Sustainable Project Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    19. Gao, Tao (Tony) & Rohm, Andrew J. & Sultan, Fareena & Pagani, Margherita, 2013. "Consumers un-tethered: A three-market empirical study of consumers' mobile marketing acceptance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2536-2544.
    20. Liébana-Cabanillas, Francisco & Marinkovic, Veljko & Ramos de Luna, Iviane & Kalinic, Zoran, 2018. "Predicting the determinants of mobile payment acceptance: A hybrid SEM-neural network approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 117-130.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:10:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-023-01904-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.