Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Examining the Influence of Teaching Presence and Task-Technology Fit on Continuance Intention to Use MOOCs

  • Regular Article
  • Published:
The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the structural relationships among factors that affect learners’ continuance intention to use Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Drawing upon the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), it posited teaching presence and task-technology fit as exogenous variables, examining how they affect continuance intention to use MOOCs, mediated by perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Based on survey data from 252 Korean MOOC learners, structural equation modeling was employed to assess the model. The results indicated that perceived usefulness affected continuance intention to use, while perceived ease of use did not; however, perceived ease of use did affect perceived usefulness. Further, teaching presence was not significantly related to continuance intention to use or perceived usefulness, but did affect perceived ease of use. However, task-technology fit affected perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and continuance intention to use. Finally, the mediating role of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use on the relationships between teaching presence as well as task-technology fit and continuance intention were confirmed. Implications were suggested for designing courses in MOOCs to increase continuance intention to use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adampoulos, P. (2013) What makes a great MOOC? An interdisciplinary analysis of student retention in online courses. In Proceedings of the international conference on information systems

  • Adams, C., Yin, Y., Madriz, L. F. V., & Mullen, C. S. (2014). A phenomenology of learning large: The tutorial sphere of xMOOC video lectures. Distance Education, 35(2), 202–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alraimi, K. M., Zo, H., & Ciganek, A. P. (2015). Understanding the MOOCs continuance: The role of openness and reputation. Computers & Education, 80, 28–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbaugh, J. B., & Hwang, A. (2006). Does “teaching presence” exist in online MBA courses? Internet and Higher Education, 9(1), 9–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baggaley, J. (2013). MOOC rampant. Distance Education, 34(3), 368–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (2012). Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(1), 8–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonk, C. J., Lee, M. M., Reeves, T. C., & Reynolds, T. H. (2015). MOOCs and open education around the world. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Breslow, L., Pritchard, D. E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G. S., Ho, A. D., & Seaton, D. T. (2013). Studying learning in the worldwide classroom research into edX’s first MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment, 8, 13–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models. (pp. 136–162). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, W. (2007). Comparing indirect effects in SEM: A sequential model fitting method using covariance-equivalent specifications. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(2), 326–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A., & Holstein, S. (2018). Analysing successful massive open online courses using the community of inquiry model as perceived by students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(5), 544–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosslin, M. (2018). Exploring self-regulated learning choices in a customisable learning pathway MOOC. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(1), 131–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Freitas, S. I., Morgan, J., & Gibson, D. (2015). Will MOOCs transform learning and teaching in higher education? Engagement and course retention in online learning provision. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 455–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, R., Benckendorff, P., & Gannaway, D. (2019). Progress and new directions for teaching and learning in MOOCs. Computers & Education, 129, 48–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dishaw, M. T., & Strong, D. M. (1999). Extending the technology acceptance model with task-technology fit constructs. Information & Management, 36(1), 9–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DoBoer, J., Ho, A. D., Stump, G. S., & Breslow, L. (2014). Changing “course”: Reconceptualizing educational variables for massive open online courses. Educational Researcher, 43(2), 74–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eom, S. B., Ashill, N., & Wen, H. J. (2006). The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: An empirical investigation. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 4(2), 215–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh, J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry framework: Review, issues, and future directions. Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157–172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gefen, D. (2003). Assessing unidimensionality through LIRSEL: An explanation and an example. Communications of The Association for Information Systems, 12(2), 23–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodhue, D. L., & Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 213–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo, P., & Reinecke, K. (2014). Demographic differences in how students navigate through MOOCs. In L@S '14 proceedings of the first ACM conference on learning @ scale conference (pp. 21–30). New York: ACM.

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2014). Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational Research Review, 12, 45–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hone, K. S., & Said, G. R. (2016). Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study. Computers & Education, 98, 157–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, H. M. (2002). Toward constructivism for adult learners in online learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 27–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huisman, B., Admiraal, W., Pilli, O., van de Ven, M., & Saab, N. (2018). Peer assessment in MOOCs: The relationship between peer reviewers’ ability and authors’ essay performance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 101–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, O., Aldholay, A., Abdullah, Z., & Ramayah, T. (2019). Online learning usage within Yemeni higher education: The role of compatibility and task-technology fit as mediating variables in the IS success model. Computers & Education, 136, 113–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joo, Y. J., Lim, K. Y., & Kim, E. K. (2011). Online university students’ satisfaction and persistence: Examining perceived level of presence, usefulness and ease of use as predictors in a structural model. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1654–1664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joo, Y. J., So, H. J., & Kim, N. H. (2018). Examination of relationships among students’ self-determination, technology acceptance, satisfaction, and continuance intention to use K-MOOCs. Computers & Education, 122, 260–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jung, Y., & Lee, J. (2018). Learning engagement and persistence in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 122, 9–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khlaisang, J., Teo, T., & Huang, F. (2019). Acceptance of a flipped smart application for learning: A study among Thai university students. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1612447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kizilcec, R. F., & Schneider, E. (2015). Motivation as a lens to understand online learners: Toward data-driven design with the OLEI scale. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 22(2), 1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. (3rd ed.). The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koutropoulos, A., Gallagher, M. S., Abajian, S. C., de Waard, I., Hogue, R. J., Keskin, N. O., & Rodriguez, C. O. (2012). Emotive vocabulary in MOOCs: Context & participant retention. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 15(1), 1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, T. J., Sørebø, A. M., & Sørebø, Ø. (2009). The role of task-technology fit as users’ motivation to continue information system use. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(3), 778–784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, D., & Lehto, M. (2013). User acceptance of YouTube for procedural learning: An extension of the Technology Acceptance Model. Computers & Education, 61, 193–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, W. S. (2012). Perceived fit and satisfaction on web learning performance: IS continuance intention and task-technology fit perspectives. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 70(7), 498–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 151–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, Y., Papagiannidis, S., & Alamanos, E. (2019). Exploring the emotional antecedents and outcomes of technology acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior, 90, 153–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margaryan, A., Bianco, M., & Littlejohn, A. (2015). Instructional quality of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Computers & Education, 80, 77–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGill, T., & Klobas, J. (2009). A task-technology fit view of learning management system impact. Computers & Education, 52(2), 496–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, A., & Widom, J. (2014). Origins of the modern MOOC (xMOOC). In F. M. Hollands, & D. Tirthali (Eds.), MOOCs: Expectations and reality (pp. 34–41). Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education. Teachers College. Columbia University. Retrieved May 3, 2020, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271841177_MOOCs_Expectations_and_reality

  • Peng, X., & Xu, Q. (2020). Investigating learners’ behaviors and discourse content in MOOC course reviews. Computers & Education, 143, 103673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rieber, L. P. (2017). Participation patterns in a massive open online course (MOOC) about statistics. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(6), 1295–1304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rizvi, S., Rienties, B., Rogaten, J., & Kizilcec, R. F. (2020). Investigating variation in learning processes in a FutureLearn MOOC. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 32(1), 162–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez-Ardura, I., & Meseguer-Artola, A. (2016). What leads people to keep on e-learning? An empirical analysis of users’ experiences and their effects on continuance intention. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(6), 1030–1053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, G., Pechenkina, E., Chase, A. M., & Ross, B. (2017). Designing Massive Open Online Courses to take account of participant motivations and expectations. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(6), 1284–1294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sass, D. A., & Smith, P. L. (2006). The effects of parceling unidimensional scales on structural parameter estimates in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 13(4), 566–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soper, D. S. (2021). A-priori Sample Size Calculator for Structural Equation Models [Software]. Retrieved from https://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc

  • Sumak, B., Hericko, M., & Pusnik, 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, 2067–2077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, E. B. (1988). Information system implementation: Bridging the gap between design and utilization. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of interaction. Education, Communication & Information, 2(1), 23–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teo, T. (2010). Examining the influence of subjective norm and facilitating conditions on the intention to use technology among pre-service teachers: a structural equation modeling of an extended technology acceptance model. Asia Pacific Education Review, 11(2), 253–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toven-Lindsey, B., Rhoads, R. A., & Lozano, J. B. (2015). Virtually unlimited classrooms: Pedagogical practices in massive open online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 24, 1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, S. F., Tsao, Y. W., Yu, L. C., Chan, C. L., & Lai, K. R. (2016). Who will pass? Analyzing learner behaviors in MOOCs. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 11(1), 1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, S. L., Watson, W. R., Richardson, J., & Loizzo, J. (2016). Instructor’s use of social presence, teaching presence, and attitudinal dissonance: A case study of an attitudinal change MOOC. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(3), 54–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, W. R., Yu, J. H., & Watson, S. L. (2018). Perceived attitudinal learning in a self-paced versus fixed-schedule MOOC. Educational Media International, 55(2), 170–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westland, J. C. (2010). Lower bounds on sample size in structural equation modeling. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 9(6), 476–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, B., & Chen, X. (2017). Continuance intention to use MOOCs: Integrating the technology acceptance model (TAM) and task technology fit (TTF) model. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 221–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xing, W., Chen, X., Stein, J., & Marcinkowski, M. (2016). Temporal prediction of dropouts in MOOCs: Reaching the low hanging fruit through stacking generalization. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 119–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, M., Shao, Z., Liu, Q., & Liu, C. (2017). Understanding the quality factors that influence the continuance intention of students toward participation in MOOCs. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(5), 1195–1214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, T. K., & Yu, T. Y. (2010). Modelling the factors that affect individuals’ utilisation of online learning systems: An empirical study combining the task technology fit model with the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), 1003–1017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhong, S. H., Zhang, Q. B., Li, Z. P., & Liu, Y. (2016). Motivations and Challenges in MOOCs with Eastern insights. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 6(12), 954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, M. (2016). Chinese university students’ acceptance of MOOCs: A self-determination perspective. Computers & Education, 92, 194–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, M., Bonk, C. J., & Sari, A. R. (2018). Instructor experiences designing MOOCs in higher education: Pedagogical, resource, and logistical considerations and challenges. Online Learning, 22(4), 203–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, M., Sari, A., & Lee, M. M. (2018). A systematic review of research methods and topics of the empirical MOOC literature (2014–2016). The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 31–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020S1A3A2A02091529).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Teaching and Learning, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Korea

    Rang Kim

  2. Department of Education, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Korea

    Hae-Deok Song

Authors
  1. Rang Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hae-Deok Song
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hae-Deok Song.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Construct

Items

Individual-technology fit (ITF)

I can independently and consciously complete courses in MOOCs

I actively participate in various types of discussions and evaluations in MOOCs

I try to win awards for outstanding performance in MOOCs

Task-technology fit (TTF)

MOOCs are fit for my learning requirements

Using MOOCs fits with my educational practice

It is easy to understand which tool to use in MOOCs

MOOCs are suitable for helping me complete online courses

Continuance intention to use

I intend to continue using MOOCs in the future

I will continue using MOOCs increasingly in the future

Given that I have access to MOOCs, I predict that I will use them

Perceived usefulness

Using MOOCs improves my learning performance

Using MOOCs increases my productivity

Using MOOCs enhances my effectiveness in my job

Perceived ease of use

It is easy to become proficient in using the MOOC platform

I find the MOOC platform easy to use

Interacting with the MOOC platform does not require much mental effort

Instructional design and organization

The instructor clearly communicated important course goals

The instructor clearly communicated important course topics

The instructor provided clear instructions on how to participate in course learning activities

The instructor clearly communicated important due dates/time frames for learning activities

The instructor helped me take advantage of the online environment to assist my learning

The instructor helped students understand and practice the kinds of behaviors acceptable in online learning environments

Facilitating discourse

The instructor was helpful in guiding the class toward agreement/understanding about course topics that helped me learn

The instructor acknowledged student participation in the course

The instructor helped keep students engaged and participating in productive dialogue

The quality of interactions with the MOOC instructor was high in this course

Direct instruction

The instructor presented content or questions that helped me learn

The instructor helped focus discussions on relevant issues in a way that helped me learn

The instructor provided explanatory feedback that helped me learn

The instructor helped me revise my thinking

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, R., Song, HD. Examining the Influence of Teaching Presence and Task-Technology Fit on Continuance Intention to Use MOOCs. Asia-Pacific Edu Res 31, 395–408 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00581-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00581-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation