Advertisement

Information Systems Frontiers

, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp 1191–1203 | Cite as

Motivations for 21st century school children to bring their own device to school

  • Nathan Hopkins
  • Mary TateEmail author
  • Allan Sylvester
  • David Johnstone
Article

Abstract

Bring-Your-Own-Device (BYOD) is an emerging phenomenon in businesses and schools. Despite accelerating adoption in schools, the factors that affect students’ use of BYOD are still not well articulated. We used a modified version of Taylor and Todd’s (1995) decomposed Theory of Planned Behaviour (D-TPB) to evaluate antecedents to behavioural intention to use BYOD in classrooms. The descriptive results paint a mixed picture, where pupil’s own enthusiasm for the use of their own devices in the class-room seems to be higher that of other parties. The results of the model show that students’ behavioural intention to use their own device is substantially influenced by their attitude and moderately influenced by their subjective norms and perceived behavioural control. This study contributes to mid-range theory by adapting the D-TPB for the study context, and has practical implications for parents, educators and officials developing BYOD policies for schools.

Keywords

BYOD Schools eLearning Students D-TPB 

References

  1. Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re having fun: cognitive absorbtion and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anjard, R. (1995). Management and planning tools. Training for Quality, 3(234–37).Google Scholar
  4. Ajzen, I. (2002). Residual effects of past on later behavior: Habituation and reasoned action perspectives. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(2), 107--122.Google Scholar
  5. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhattacharjee, A. (2001). Understanding information systems continuance: an expectation-confirmation model. MIS Quarterly, 25(3), 351–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chan, T., Roschelle, J., Hsi, S., Kinshuk, K., Sharples, M., Brown, T. J., et al. (2006). One-to-one technology-enhanced learning: an opportunity for global research collaboration. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(1), 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Douglas, R. (2011). ICT for teaching and ICT for learning: They are not the same. Computers in New Zealand Schools, 23(2), 126–136.Google Scholar
  10. Fisher, A. (2011, 20 March). Teachers put in the picture on ‘screenagers’. The DomnionPost. Wellington. Retrieved from www.stuff.co.nz
  11. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 6.Google Scholar
  12. Gefen, D. (2003). TAM or just plain habit: a look at experienced online shoppers. Journal of End User Computing Hershey: Jul-Sep 2003, 15(3), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M. C. (2000). Structural equation Modelling and Regression. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 4(7), 1–70.Google Scholar
  14. Gikas, J., & Grant, M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media. The Internet and Higher Education, 19(18–26).Google Scholar
  15. Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  16. Harris, C. (2012). Going mobile: key issues to consider for schools weighing BYOD. School Library Journal, 58(1), 14.Google Scholar
  17. Hartwick, J., & Barki, H. (1994). Explaining the role of user participation in information system use. Management Science, 40(4), 440–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hong, S.-J., Thong, J., Moon, J.-Y., & Tam, K.-Y. (2008). Understanding the behaviour of mobile data services consumers. Information Systems Frontiers, 10(4), 431–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. John, P., & Sutherland, R. (2005). Affordance, opportunity, and the pedagogical implications of ICT. Educational Review, 57(4), 405–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kappelman, L., McLean, E. R., Luftman, J., & Johnson, V. (2013). Key Issues of IT Organizations and Their Leadership: The 2013 SIM IT Trends Study. MIS Quarterly Executive, 14(4), 227–240.Google Scholar
  21. Kartas, A., & Goode, S. (2012). Use, perceived deterrence and the role of software piracy in video game console adoption. Information Systems Frontiers, 14(2), 261–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kline, P. (2000). Handbook of Psychological Testing. In London. England: Routledge (Taylor Francis Group).Google Scholar
  23. Lee, M. (2010). Explaining and predicting users’ continuance intention toward e-learning: An extension of the expectation–confirmation mode. Computers & Education, 54(2), 506–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liaw, S., Huang, H., & Chen, G. (2007). An activity-theoretical approach to investigate learners’ factors toward e-learning systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(4), 1906–1920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nielson, L. (2013). Seven Myths about BYOD. thejournal.com, 1–3
  26. Norris, C., & Soloway, E. (2011). From Banning to BYOD: the inevitable shift is at the heart of school change. District Administration, 47(5), 94.Google Scholar
  27. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd Edition) New York. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  28. Peng, H., Chou, C., & Chang, C.-Y. (2008). From virtual environments to physical environments: exploring interactivity in ubiquitous learning systems. Educational Technology and Society, 11(2), 54–66.Google Scholar
  29. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  30. Straub, E. (2009). Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 625–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sumac, B., Hericko, M., & Pusnick, M. (2011). A meta-analysis of e-learning technology acceptance: the role of user types and e-learning technology types. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6), 2067–2077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tate, M., & Hoshek, D. (2009). A model for the effective management of re-usable learning objects (RLOs): lessons from a case study. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 5(1), 51–72.Google Scholar
  33. Tate, M., Evermann, J., & Gable, G. (2015). An integrated framework for theories of individual attitudes towards technology. Information Management, 52(6), 710–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Assessing IT Usage: The Role of Prior Experience. MIS Quarterly, 19(4), 561–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Thompson, G. (2012). BYOD: enabling the chaos. Network Security, 2012(2), 5–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Turel, O., Sreenko, A., & Giles, P. (2011). Integrating technology addiction and use: an empirical investigation of online auction users. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 1043–1061.Google Scholar
  37. Ullman, E. (2011). BYOD and Security. Tech & Learning, 31(8), 32–34.Google Scholar
  38. Utiger, T. (2013, 4 August). Cellphones log into classroom learning. DominionPost. Wellington. Retrieved from www.stuff.co.nz
  39. van der Heijden, H. (2004). User Acceptance of Hedonic Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 28(4), 695–704.Google Scholar
  40. Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. (2000). A Theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G., & Davis, F. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: towards a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.Google Scholar
  43. Xu, J., Fan, X., & Du, J. (2016). A study of the validity and reliability of the distraction scale: a psychometric evaluation. Measurement, 81, 36–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nathan Hopkins
    • 1
  • Mary Tate
    • 1
    Email author
  • Allan Sylvester
    • 1
  • David Johnstone
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Information ManagementVictoria University of WellingtonWellingtonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations