Keyword

Information Systems Use; Interactivity Higher Education Management Information Systems Structure Equation Modelling Experiential Survey

Abstract

Technology is capable of revolutionizing the management of higher education institutions and improving services they provide. However, this does not happen in many cases because, either the appropriate technology is not available, or because technology is simply not used. The last decade has seen substantial investments in technology infrastructure for higher education enterprises. Resource constrains and accreditations requirements oblige higher education institutions to set their technology priority and select the most appropriate systems. This paper suggests and empirically evaluates a predicting Higher Education Management Information Systems (HEMIS) use model. Built on well-established information systems user’s behavioural models, the model suggested by this research hypothesizes that degree of interactivity have significant effect on HEMIS use, where user’s attitude and intension to use are mediator factors. The paper reports the findings of an experiential survey study, conducted over 110 higher education administration staff of different managerial levels, in 7 different higher education entities, looking at their use of three types of HEMIS. Structural Equation Modelling is employed to evaluate the goodness-to-fit of the suggested model. The results provide empirical evidence on how interactivity affects user behaviour in HEMIS context. Furthermore, the study reports some interesting findings concerning the use of HEMIS highly interactive tools within the enviro


Full Text : PDF

References
  1. Ajzen, I. (1985). From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behaviour. In J. Kuhl and J. Beckmann (Eds.). Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior. Springer. 11-39. ISBN: 0-38713-445x.
  2. Chin, W. (1998). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modelling. In G., Marcoulides (Ed.). Modern Methods for Business Research: Methodology for Business & Management Series. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 295-336. ISBN: 0805826777  
  3. Davis, F., D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-339. 
  4. El Said, G., R. (2014). Card Sorting Assessing User attitude in E-Learning. In P. Zaphiris and A. Loannou (Eds.). Learning and Collaboration Technologies: Designing and Developing Novel Learning Experiences. Proceedings of the 16st Human Computer Interaction HCI International Conference. Springer Publication. Crete, Greece, 22-27 June 2014, 261 – 272.
  5. Filkins, W. J., Kehoe, E. L. and McLaughlin, W. G. (2001). Retention Research: Issues in Comparative Analysis. The Annual Meeting of the Association for Institutional Research, Long Beach, CA, June 2001.
  6. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behaviour: An Introduction to Theory and Research. MA: Addison-Wesley.
  7. Gefen, D. (2000). E-commerce: The Role of Familiarity and Trust. Omega: The International Journal of Management Science, 28, 725-737. 
  8. Gefen, D. and Straub, D. (2003). Managing User Trust in B2C e-Services, E-Service Journal, 2(2), Spring 2003, 7-24. Available at: http://www.e-sj.org/, last access: 10 August 2005. 
  9. Giardina, M. (1992), Interactivity and intelligent advisory strategies in a multimedia learning environment: human factors, design issues and technical considerations. In M. Giardina (Ed.). Interactive Multimedia Learning Environments: Human Factors and Technical Considerations on Design Issues. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  10. Goldstein, J, P. (2005). Academic Analytics: The Uses of Management Information and Technology in Higher Education. ECAR Key Findings, Educause Center for Applied Research. December 2005.
  11. Graham, A. E., and Morse, R J. (1998).  Our method explained.  U.S. News and World Report, 125(8), 82-83.
  12. Johnson, J. L.  (2000). Learning communities and special efforts in retention of university students:  What works, what doesn’t and is the return worth the investment?  Journal of College Student Retention:  Research, Theory & Practice, 2(3), 219-238.
  13. Keil, M., Tan, B., Wei, K., Saarinen, T., Tuunainen, V. and Wassenaar, A. (2000). A Cross-Cultural Study on Escalation of Communication Behaviour in Software Projects. MIS Quarterly. Jun 2000, 24(2), 299-325. 
  14. Kettanurak, V., Ramamurthy, K. and Haseman, W. D. (2001). User attitude as a mediator of learning performance improvement in an interactive multimedia environment: an empirical investigation of the degree of interactivity and learning styles. International Journal of Human Computer Studies: Incorporating Knowledge Acquisition, 54 (4), April, 541-583.
  15. King, S. E. and Chepyator-Thomson, J. R. (1996).  Factors affecting the enrolment and persistence of African-American doctoral students.  Physical Educator, 53(4), 170-181.
  16. Krathwohl, D. (1997). Methods of Educational and Social Science Research: an Integrated Approach, Addison Wesley Longman, 2nd edition. ISBN: 0-8013-2029-1.
  17. Levitz, R. S., Noel, L. and Richter, B. J. (1999). Strategic Moves for Retention Success.  New Directions for Higher Education, 1999(108), 31-49.
  18. McGrath, M. and Braunstein, A.  (1997).The prediction of freshmen attrition: An examination of the importance of certain demographic, academic, financial, and social factors.  College Student Journal, 31, 396-408.
  19. Morris, M. and Dillon, A. (1997). How User Perceptions Influence Software Use. IEEE Software, 14(4), 58-65.
  20. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. Academic Press. ISBN: 0-12-518406-9.
  21. Pascarella, E. T. (1980). Student-faculty informal contact and college outcomes.  Review of Educational Research, 50, 545-595.
  22. Sanyal, C, B.  (1994). The Use of computerized information systems to increase efficiency in university management.  Higher Education Management Information Systems (HEMIS) Seminar, Yunnan University, China, 12-16 December 1994.
  23. Shields, N.  (1994). Retention, academic success, and progress among adult, returning students: A comparison of the effects of institutional and external factors.  NACADA Journal, 14(1), 13-24.
  24. Tabachnick, B. and Fidell, L. (2000). Using Multivariate Statistics. Allyn and Bacon, 4th edition. ISBN: 0-321-05677-9.
  25. Taylor, S. And Todd, P.A. (1995). Understanding Information Technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144-176.
  26. Thompson, R., Barclay, D. and Higgins, C. (1995). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Causal Modelling: Personal Computer Adoption and Use as an Illustration. Technology Studies: Special Issue on Research Methodology, 2 (2), 284-324.
  27. Zack, M. (1993). Interactivity and communication mode choice in ongoing management groups. Information Systems Research, 6, 207-239.