Data-driven practices are now crucial in the digital age for streamlining operations and boosting output across a range of industries. With e-Learning emerging as a cutting-edge and promising strategy to improve educational delivery and student engagement, higher education institutions are also adopting this trend. Despite the potential advantages, e-Learning adoption in higher education is still a developing topic with scant published research.
OBJECTIVE:
This study aims to conduct a thorough analysis of existing literature, seeking to determine the present status of e-Learning adoption in higher education while also identifying promising avenues for further research.
METHODS:
In this study, a systematic literature review methodology and a bibliometric approach are utilized to examine 63 papers sourced from the Scopus database, encompassing the years 2017 to 2021. These papers were specifically chosen due to their pertinence to e-Learning adoption in higher education institutions, following the exclusion and inclusion criteria outlined in the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) framework. The analysis techniques employed include descriptive overviews, citation analysis, and keyword co-occurrence.
RESULTS:
The systematic review of the literature revealed a significant increase in e-Learning adoption within higher education institutions (HEIs) in recent times. The findings highlighted several crucial factors influencing e-Learning adoption, including perceived ease of use, usefulness, learner attitude, self-efficacy, and facilitating conditions. However, further investigation is needed to better understand the impact of perceived learning and teaching styles on e-Learning acceptance in higher education settings.
CONCLUSION:
This study suggests conducting future investigations on e-Learning in developing countries, with a specific focus on intention, usage, adoption, and impact. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of exploring the influence of learning and teaching styles on e-Learning acceptance within higher education institutions. These valuable insights will facilitate the development of effective strategies for the successful implementation of e-Learning in higher education settings.
EzeSC, Chinedu-EzeVCA, OkikeCK, BelloAO. Factors influencing the use of e-learning facilities by students in a private Higher Education Institution (HEI) in a developing economy. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2020;7(1):1–15. DOI: 10.1057/s41599-020-00624-6
2.
AkcayirM, AkcayirG, PektasHM, OcakMA. Augmented reality in science laboratories: The effects of augmented reality on university students’ laboratory skills and attitudes toward science laboratories. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;57:334–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.054
3.
Al ShuailiK, Al MusawiAS, HussainRM. The effectiveness of using augmented reality in teaching geography curriculum on the achievement and attitudes of Omani 10th Grade Students. Multidiscip J Educ Soc Technol Sci. 2020;7(2):20. DOI: 10.4995/muse.2020.13014
4.
AwanRK, AfshanG, MemonAB. Adoption of E-learning at higher education institutions: A systematic literature review. Multidisciplinary Journal for Education, Social and Technological Sciences. 2021;8(2):74–91. DOI: 10.4995/muse.2021.15813
5.
Valverde-BerrocosoJ, del Carmen Garrido-ArroyoM, Burgos-VidelaC, Morales-CevallosMB. Trends in educational research about e-Learning: A systematic literature review (2009-2018). Sustain Switz. 2020;12(12). DOI: 10.3390/su12125153
6.
KjellsdotterA. What matter(s)? A didactical analysis of primary school teachers’ ICT integration. J Curric Stud. 2020;52(6):823–39. DOI: 10.1080/00220272.2020.1759144
7.
MemonAB, MeyerK. Why We Need Dedicated Web-based Collaboration Platforms for Inter-organizational Connectivity? A Research Synthesis. Int J Inf Technol Comput Sci. 2017;9(11):1–11. DOI: 10.5815/ijitcs.2017.11.01
8.
SinghV, ThurmanA. How Many Ways Can We Define Online Learning? A Systematic Literature Review of Definitions of Online Learning (1988-2018). Am J Distance Educ. 2019;33(4):289–306. DOI: 10.1080/08923647.2019.1663082
9.
WuJH, TennysonRD, HsiaTL. A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Comput Educ. 2010;55(1):155–64. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.12.012
10.
TarhiniA, HoneK, LiuX. Measuring the moderating effect of gender and age on E-learning acceptance in England: A structural equation modeling approach for an extended Technology Acceptance Model. J Educ Comput Res. 2014;51(2):163–84. DOI: 10.2190/EC.51.2.b
11.
LeoS, AlsharariNM, AbbasJ, AlshuridehMTFrom offline to online learning: A qualitative study of challenges and opportunities as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the UAE higher education context. Eff Coronavirus Dis COVID-19 Bus Intell. 2021;203-17. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-67151-8_12
12.
SathishkumarV, RadhaR, SaravanakumarA, MahalakshmiK. E-Learning during Lockdown of Covid-19 Pandemic: A Global Perspective. Int J Control Autom. 2020;13(June);13(4):1088–99.
13.
Al-AzaweiA, ParslowP, LundqvistK. Investigating the effect of learning styles in a blended e-learning system: An extension of the technology acceptance model (TAM). Australas J Educ Technol. 2017;33(2):1–23. DOI: 10.14742/ajet.2741
14.
KhanAA, UmairSHandbook of Research on Mobile Devices and Smart Gadgets in K-12 Education. Handb Res Mob Devices Smart Gadgets K-12 Educ. 2017;(December):1-399. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-2706-0
15.
PopoolaSO, OlajideOO. Influence of Library Anxiety and Computer Literacy Skills on Use of Library Information Resources by Undergraduates in Private Universities in Southwest Nigeria. Int Inf Libr Rev. 2022;54(1):53–67. DOI: 10.1080/10572317.2021.1873051
16.
PhamL, LimbuYB, BuiTK, NguyenHT, PhamHT. Does e-learning service quality influence e-learning student satisfaction and loyalty? Evidence from Vietnam. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2019;16(1). DOI: 10.1186/s41239-019-0136-3
17.
RasheedRA, KamsinA, AbdullahNA. Challenges in the online component of blended learning: A systematic review. Comput Educ. 2020;144(March 2019):103701. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103701
18.
KobusińskaA, LeungC, HsuCH, RaghavendraS, ChangVEmerging trends, issues and challenges in Internet of Things, Big Data and cloud computing. Vol. 87, Future Generation Computer Systems. Elsevier; 2018. pp. 416-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.future.2018.05.021
19.
HudaM, MaselenoA, AtmotiyosoP, SiregarM, AhmadR, JasmiK, MuhamadN. Big data emerging technology: Insights into innovative environment for online learning resources. Int J Emerg Technol Learn. 2018;13(1):23–36. DOI: 10.3991/ijet.v13i01.6990
20.
LangeC, CostleyJ. Improving online video lectures: learning challenges created by media. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2020;17(1). DOI: 10.1186/s41239-020-00190-6
21.
KitchenhamB, BreretonOP, BudgenD, TurnerM, BaileyJ, LinkmanS. Systematic literature reviews in software engineering - A systematic literature review. Inf Softw Technol. 2009;51(1):7–15. DOI: 10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009
22.
KitchenhamB, ChartersSothers. Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. UK; 2007.
23.
StapicZ, LópezEG, CabotAG, de Marcos OrtegaL, StrahonjaVPerforming systematic literature review in software engineering. In: Central European Conference on Information and Intelligent Systems. Faculty of Organization and Informatics Varazdin; 2012. pp. 441.
24.
PaulJ, CriadoAR. The art of writing literature review: What do we know and what do we need to know?Int Bus Rev. 2020;29(4). DOI: 10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101717
25.
PaulJ, LimWM, O’CassA, HaoAW, BrescianiSScientific procedures and rationales for systematic literature reviews (SPAR-4-SLR). Int J Consum Stud. 2021;(July). DOI: 10.1111/ijcs.12695
26.
WilliamsRI, ClarkLA, ClarkWR, RaffoDM. Re-examining systematic literature review in management research: Additional benefits and execution protocols. Eur Manag J. 2021;39(4):521–33. DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2020.09.007
AgarwalA, DurairajanayagamD, TatagariS, EstevesSC, HarlevA, HenkelR, RoychoudhuryS, HomaS, PuchaltNG, RamasamyR, MajzoubA. Bibliometrics: tracking research impact by selecting the appropriate metrics. Asian J Androl. 2016;18(2):296–309. DOI: 10.4103/1008-682X.171582
29.
NagendrababuV, DuncanHF, TsesisI, SathornC, PulikkotilSJ, DharmarajanL, DummerPM. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses for abstracts: best practice for reporting abstracts of systematic reviews in Endodontology. Int Endod J. 2019;52(8):1096–107. DOI: 10.1111/iej.13118
30.
RanabhatD, VermaN, KumarD, SiringoringoH. The adoption of digital financial inclusion in developing countries: A systematic literature review. Int J Electron Finance. 2022;11(2):117–42. DOI: 10.1504/IJEF.2022.122178
MengL, WenKH, BrewinR, WuQ. Knowledge atlas on the relationship between urban street space and residents’ health-a bibliometric analysis based on vos viewer and cite space. Sustain Switz. 2020;12(6). DOI: 10.3390/su12062384
33.
YuY, LiY, ZhangZ, GuZ, ZhongH, ZhaQ, YangL, ZhuC, ChenE. A bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer of publications on COVID-19. Ann Transl Med. 2020;8(13):816. DOI: 10.21037/atm-20-4235
34.
EckNJ van, WaltmanL. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics. 2010;84(2):523–38. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
35.
SukamolsonS. Fundamentals of quantitative research. Lang Inst Chulalongkorn Univ. 2007;1(3):1–20.
36.
CohenL, ManionL, MorrisonK Research methods in education. routledge; 2017.
37.
EsselHB, VlachopoulosD, Tachie-MensonA, JohnsonEE, EbeheakeyAK. Technology-induced stress, sociodemographic factors, and association with academic achievement and productivity in ghanaian higher education during the covid-19 pandemic. Inf Switz. 2021;12(12). DOI: 10.3390/info12120497
38.
AlismaielOA. Using structural equation modeling to assess online learning systems’ educational sustainability for university students. Sustain Switz. 2021;13(24). DOI: 10.3390/su132413565
39.
KippM. Impact of the covid-19 pandemic on the acceptance and use of an e-learning platform. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(21). DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182111372
40.
AlamGM, AsimiranS. Online technology: Sustainable higher education or diploma disease for emerging society during emergency—comparison between pre and during COVID-19. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2021;172. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121034
41.
ThongsriN, ChootongC, TripakO, PiyawanitsatianP, SaengaeR. Predicting the determinants of online learning adoption during the COVID-19 outbreak: a two-staged hybrid SEM-neural network approach. Interact Technol Smart Educ. 2021;18(3):362–79. DOI: 10.1108/ITSE-08-2020-0165
42.
AroraS, ChaudharyP, SinghRK. Impact of coronavirus and online exam anxiety on self-efficacy: the moderating role of coping strategy. Interact Technol Smart Educ. 2021;18(3):475–92. DOI: 10.1108/ITSE-08-2020-0158
43.
Al-HajriS, EchchabiA, AyedhAM, OmarMMS. The cloud computing systems’ adoption in the higher education sector in oman in light of the covid-19 pandemic. Int J Eval Res Educ. 2021;10(3):930–7. DOI: 10.11591/ijere.v10i3.21671
Al-AdwanAS, AlbelbisiNA, HujranO, Al-RahmiWM, AlkhalifahA. Developing a holistic success model for sustainable e-learning: A structural equation modeling approach. Sustain Switz. 2021;13(16). DOI: 10.3390/su13169453
46.
SholikahM, HarsonoD. Investigating Student’s Satisfaction and Acceptance of Digital Technology in Higher Education in Indonesia. TEM J. 2021;10(2):932–8. DOI: 10.18421/TEM102-56
47.
HoIMK, CheongKY, WeldonA. Predicting student satisfaction of emergency remote learning in higher education during COVID-19 using machine learning techniques. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(4 April). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249423
48.
Meletiou-MavrotherisM, MavrouK, RebeloPV. The Role of Learning and Communication Technologies in Online Courses’ Design and Delivery: A Cross-National Study of Faculty Perceptions and Practices. Front Educ. 2021;6. DOI: 10.3389/feduc.2021.558676
49.
Ramírez-HurtadoJM, Hernández-DíazAG, López-SánchezAD, Pérez-LeónVE. Measuring online teaching service quality in higher education in the covid-19 environment. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(5):1–14. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18052403
50.
QashouA. Influencing factors in M-learning adoption in higher education. Educ Inf Technol. 2021;26(2):1755–85. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-020-10323-z
51.
SsemugenyiF, Nuru SejeT. A decade of unprecedented e-learning adoption and adaptation: Covid-19 revolutionizes teaching and learning at Papua New Guinea University of Technology (PNGUoT): “Is it a wave of change or a mere change in the wave?” Cogent Educ. 2021;8(1). DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2021.1989997
52.
BadwelanA, BahaddadAA. Determine the Main Target Audience Characteristics in M-learning Applications in Saudi Arabian University Communities. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl. 2021;12(8):306–20. DOI: 10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120836
53.
Al-shargabiB, SabriO, AljawarnehS. The adoption of an e-learning system using information systems success model: a case study of Jazan University. PeerJ Comput Sci. 2021;7:1–21. DOI: 10.7717/peerj-cs.723
54.
AlammaryA, AlshaikhM, AlhogailA. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the adoption of e-learning among academics in Saudi Arabia. Behaviour & Information Technology. 2022;41(14):3138–60. DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2021.1973106
55.
AlrousanMK, Al-MadadhaA, Al KhasawnehMH, Adel TweissiA. Determinants of virtual classroom adoption in Jordan: the case of princess Sumaya university for technology. Interact Technol Smart Educ. 2022;19(2):121–44. DOI: 10.1108/ITSE-09-2020-0211
56.
ZaidiSFH, OsmanajV, AliO, ZaidiSAH. Adoption of mobile technology for mobile learning by university students during COVID-19. Int J Inf Learn Technol. 2021;38(4):329–43. DOI: 10.1108/IJILT-02-2021-0033
57.
AlhumaidK, HabesM, SalloumSA. Examining the Factors Influencing the Mobile Learning Usage during COVID-19 Pandemic: An Integrated SEM-ANN Method. IEEE Access. 2021;9:102567–78. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3097753
58.
Al-HunaiyyanA, AlhajriR, Al-SharhanS, BimbaA. Human-Computer Interaction Perspective on Mobile Learning: Gender and Social Implications. Int J Interact Mob Technol. 2021;15(11):4–20. DOI: 10.3991/ijim.v15i11.21367
59.
HoRC, SongBL. Immersive live streaming experience in satisfying the learners’ need for self-directed learning. Interactive Technology and Smart Education. 2022;19(2):145–60. DOI: 10.1108/ITSE-12-2020-0242
60.
AbdallahN, AbdallahO, BohraO. Factors Affecting Mobile Learning Acceptance in Higher Education: An Empirical Study. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl. 2021;12(4):664–71. DOI: 10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120482
61.
EjdysJ. Factors affecting the adoption of e-learning at university level. WSEAS Trans Bus Econ. 2021;18:313–23. DOI: 10.37394/23207.2021.18.32
62.
LinSH, LeeHC, Chang TerC, JamesFu C. Behavioral intention towards mobile learning in Taiwan, China, Indonesia, and Vietnam. Technol Soc. 2020;63:101387. DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101387
63.
MohanMM, UpadhyayaP, PillaiKR. Intention and barriers to use MOOCs: An investigation among the post graduate students in India. Educ Inf Technol. 2020;25(6):5017–31. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-020-10215-2
64.
AbdouD, JasimuddinSM. The use of the UTAUT model in the adoption of E-learning technologies: An empirical study in France based banks. J Glob Inf Manag. 2020;28(4):38–51. DOI: 10.4018/JGIM.2020100103
65.
MeriemB, YoussefAM. Exploratory analysis of factors influencing e-learning adoption by higher education teachers: Case study: Abdelmalek Essaâdi University- Morocco. Educ Inf Technol. 2020;25(3):2297–319. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-019-10075-5
66.
MatariranoO, JereNR, SibandaHS, PanickerM. Antecedents of Blackboard Adoption by Lecturers at a South African Higher Education Institution - Extending GETAMEL. Int J Emerg Technol Learn. 2020;16(1):60–79. DOI: 10.3991/IJET.V16I01.16821
67.
BhardwajAK, GargL, GargA, GajpalY. E-learning during COVID-19 outbreak: Cloud computing adoption in indian public universities. Comput Mater Contin. 2020;66(3):2471–92. DOI: 10.32604/cmc.2021.014099
68.
VanithaPS, AlathurS. E-learning adoption based on gender differences: Insight from India. Int J Innov Learn. 2020;28(4):510–38. DOI: 10.1504/IJIL.2020.110683
69.
WongA, JeganathanS. Factors that influence e-learning adoption by international students in Canada. Int J Manag Educ. 2020;14(5):453–70. DOI: 10.1504/ijmie.2020.109687
70.
AburagagaI, AgoyiM, ElgedawyI. Assessing Faculty’s Use of Social Network Tools in Libyan Higher Education via a Technology Acceptance Model. IEEE Access. 2020;8:116415–30. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3004200
71.
DlalisaSF, GovenderDW. Challenges of acceptance and usage of a learning management system amongst academics. Int J EBusiness EGovernment Stud. 2020;12(1):1–16. DOI: 10.34111/ijebeg.202012105
72.
HuX, LaiC. Comparing factors that influence learning management systems use on computers and on mobile. Inf Learn Sci. 2019;120(7-8):468–88. DOI: 10.1108/ILS-12-2018-0127
73.
AmeenN, WillisR, AbdullahMN, ShahM. Towards the successful integration of e-learning systems in higher education in Iraq: A student perspective. Br J Educ Technol. 2019;50(3):1434–46. DOI: 10.1111/bjet.12651
74.
FaganMH. Factors Influencing Student Acceptance of Mobile Learning in Higher Education. Comput Sch. 2019;36(2):105–21. DOI: 10.1080/07380569.2019.1603051
75.
Al-araibiAAM, Naz’ri bin MahrinM, YusoffRCM, ChupratSB. A model for technological aspect of e-learning readiness in higher education. Educ Inf Technol. 2019;24(2):1395–-431. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-018-9837-9
76.
Valencia-AriasA, Chalela-NaffahS, Bermúdez-HernándezJ. A proposed model of e-learning tools acceptance among university students in developing countries. Educ Inf Technol. 2019;24(2):1057–71. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-018-9815-2
77.
KaliisaR, PalmerE, MillerJ. Mobile learning in higher education: A comparative analysis of developed and developing country contexts. Br J Educ Technol. 2019;50(2):546–61. DOI: 10.1111/bjet.12583
78.
AlshehriA, RutterM, SmithS. The Effects Of Utaut And Usability Qualities On Students’ Use Of Learning Management Systems In Saudi Tertiary Education. J Inf Technol Educ Res. 2019;19:891–930. DOI: 10.28945/4659
79.
Sarbaini, Jumadi, AbbasEW, RajianiI. Managing e-learning in public universities by investigating the role of culture. Pol J Manag Stud. 2019;20(1):394–404. DOI: 10.17512/pjms.2019.20.1.34
80.
AlmaiahMA, AlamriMM, Al-RahmiW. Applying the UTAUT Model to Explain the Students’ Acceptance of Mobile Learning System in Higher Education. IEEE Access. 2019;7:174673–86. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2957206
81.
BinyaminSS, RutterMJ, SmithS. Extending the technology acceptance model to understand students’ use of learning management systems in Saudi higher education. Int J Emerg Technol Learn. 2019;14(3):4–21. DOI: 10.3991/ijet.v14i03.9732
82.
Al-RahmiWM, YahayaN, AldraiweeshAA, AlamriMM, AljarboaNA, AlturkiU, AljeraiwiAA. Integrating Technology Acceptance Model with Innovation Diffusion Theory: An Empirical Investigation on Students’ Intention to Use E-Learning Systems. IEEE Access. 2019;7:26797–809. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2899368
83.
Cabero-AlmenaraJ, ArancibiaML, Del PreteA. Technical and didactic knowledge of the moodle LMS in higher education. Beyond functional use. J New Approaches Educ Res. 2019;8(1):25–33. DOI: 10.7821/naer.2019.1.327
84.
AldholayAH, IsaacO, AbdullahZ, RamayahT. The role of transformational leadership as a mediating variable in DeLone and McLean information system success model: The context of online learning usage in Yemen. Telemat Inform. 2018;35(5):1421–37. DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2018.03.012
85.
Al-RahmiWM, AliasN, OthmanMS, AlzahraniAI, AlfarrajO, SagedAA, RahmanNS. Use of E-Learning by University Students in Malaysian Higher Educational Institutions: A Case in Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. IEEE Access. 2018;6:14268–76. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2802325
86.
MartinhoD, SantosE, MiguelMI, CordeiroD. Factors that influence the adoption of postgraduate online courses. Int J Emerg Technol Learn. 2018;13(12):123–41. DOI: 10.3991/ijet.v13i12.8864
87.
AlharbiH, SandhuK. Explaining and predicting continuance usage intention of e-learning recommender systems: An empirical evidence from Saudi Arabia. Int J Bus Inf Syst. 2018;29(3):297–323. DOI: 10.1504/IJBIS.2018.095565
88.
SolangiZA, Al ShahraniF, PandhianiSM. Factors affecting successful implementation of elearning: Study of colleges and institutes sector RCJ Saudi Arabia. Int J Emerg Technol Learn. 2018;13(6):223–30. DOI: 10.3991/ijet.v13i06.8537
89.
Al-AdwanAS, Al-MadadhaA, ZvirzdinaiteZ. Modeling students’ readiness to adopt mobile learning in higher education: An empirical study. Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn. 2018;19(1):221–41. DOI: 10.19173/irrodl.v19i1.3256
90.
Al-AdwanAS, Al-AdwanA, BergerH. Solving the mystery of mobile learning adoption in higher education. Int J Mob Commun. 2018;16(1):24–49. DOI: 10.1504/IJMC.2018.088271
91.
LuHK, LinPC, ChenAN. An empirical study of behavioral intention model: Using learning and teaching styles as individual differences. J Discrete Math Sci Cryptogr. 2017;20(1):19–41. DOI: 10.1080/09720529.2016.1177968
92.
BervellB, UmarIN. A decade of LMS acceptance and adoption research in Sub-Sahara African higher education: A systematic review of models, methodologies, milestones and main challenges. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ. 2017;13(11):7269–86. DOI: 10.12973/ejmste/79444
93.
KanwalF, RehmanM. Factors Affecting E-Learning Adoption in Developing Countries-Empirical Evidence from Pakistan’s Higher Education Sector. IEEE Access. 2017;5:10968–78. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2714379
94.
Liu C. The adoption of e-learning beyond MOOCs for higher education. Int J Account Inf Manag. 2020;29(2):217–27. DOI: 10.1108/IJAIM-08-2020-0129
95.
BarclayC, DonaldsC, Osei-BrysonKM. Investigating critical success factors in online learning environments in higher education systems in the Caribbean. Inf Technol Dev. 2018;24(3):582–611. DOI: 10.1080/02681102.2018.1476831
96.
HamidiH, ChavoshiA. Analysis of the essential factors for the adoption of mobile learning in higher education: A case study of students of the University of Technology. Telemat Inform. 2018;35(4):1053–70. DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2017.09.016
97.
JamilLS. Assessing the behavioural intention of students towards Learning Management System, through technology acceptance model - Case of Iraqi universities. J Theor Appl Inf Technol. 2017;95(16):3825–40.
GerasimovaVG, MelamudMR, TutaevaDR, RomanovaYD, ZhenovaNA. The adoption of e-learning technology at the faculty of distance learning of plekhanov Russian university of economics. J Soc Stud Educ Res. 2018;9(2):172–88. DOI: 10.17499/jsser.20153
100.
Al-OkailyM, AlqudahH, MatarA, LutfiA, TaamnehA. Dataset on the Acceptance of e-learning System among Universities Students’ under the COVID-19 Pandemic Conditions. Data Brief. 2020;32:0–4. DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2020.106176
101.
AlqahtaniAY, RajkhanAA. E-learning critical success factors during the covid-19 pandemic: A comprehensive analysis of e-learning managerial perspectives. Educ Sci. 2020;10(9):1–16. DOI: 10.3390/educsci10090216
102.
AzlanCA, WongJH, TanLK, HuriMS, UngNM, PallathV, TanCP, YeongCH, NgKH. Teaching and learning of postgraduate medical physics using Internet-based e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic - A case study from Malaysia. Phys Med. 2020;80:10–6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejm2020.10.002
103.
AlharbiS, DrewS. Using the Technology Acceptance Model in Understanding Academics’ Behavioural Intention to Use Learning Management Systems. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl. 2014;5(1):143–55. DOI: 10.14569/ijacsa.2014.050120
104.
ChengYM. Effects of quality antecedents on e-learning acceptance. Internet Res. 2012;22(3):361–90. DOI: 10.1108/10662241211235699
