Personal Learning Environments in the Workplace: An Exploratory Study into the Key Business Decision Factors

Personal Learning Environments in the Workplace: An Exploratory Study into the Key Business Decision Factors

Arunangsu Chatterjee (University of Leicester, Leicester, UK ), Effie Lai-Chong Law (University of Leicester, Leicester, UK), Alexander Mikroyannidis (Open University, Milton Keynes, UK), Glyn Owen (British Institute of Learning and Development, Bristol, UK) and Karen Velasco (British Institute of Learning and Development, Bristol, UK )
Copyright: © 2013 |Volume: 4 |Issue: 4 |Article: 4 |Pages: 15
ISSN: 1947-8518|EISSN: 1947-8526|DOI: 10.4018/ijvple.2013100104
Cite Article Cite Article

MLA

Chatterjee, Arunangsu, Effie Lai-Chong Law, Alexander Mikroyannidis, Glyn Owen and Karen Velasco. "Personal Learning Environments in the Workplace: An Exploratory Study into the Key Business Decision Factors." IJVPLE 4.4 (2013): 44-58. Web. 1 Jan. 2019. doi:10.4018/ijvple.2013100104

APA

Chatterjee, A., Law, E. L., Mikroyannidis, A., Owen, G., & Velasco, K. (2013). Personal Learning Environments in the Workplace: An Exploratory Study into the Key Business Decision Factors. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE), 4(4), 44-58. doi:10.4018/ijvple.2013100104

Chicago

Chatterjee, Arunangsu, Effie Lai-Chong Law, Alexander Mikroyannidis, Glyn Owen and Karen Velasco. "Personal Learning Environments in the Workplace: An Exploratory Study into the Key Business Decision Factors," International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE) 4 (2013): 4, accessed (January 01, 2019), doi:10.4018/ijvple.2013100104

Export Reference

Mendeley
Favorite Full-Issue PDF

Abstract

Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) have emerged as a solution to the need of learners for open and easily customisable learning environments. PLEs essentially hand complete control over the learning process to the learner. However, this learning model is not fully compatible with learning in the workplace, which is influenced by certain business factors. These factors are being investigated in this paper, through an exploratory study within a variety of private organisations in the UK. Based on the results of this study, 10 key factors affecting the adoption of PLEs in the workplace have been identified. The authors propose a framework for the adoption and diffusion of PLEs, aiming at informing decision makers within commercial organisations about the successful introduction of novel learning methodologies in their respective organisations.

References

Atkins D. E. Brown J. S. Hammond A. L. (2007). A review of the open educational resources (OER) movement: Achievements, challenges, and new opportunities. Review literature and arts of the Americas (Vol. 2008, p. 84). The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
Attwell G. (2007). Personal learning environments-the future of elearning?[Citeseer.]. ELearning Papers, 2(January), 1–8.
Bagozzi R. P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift.Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(4), 243–254.
Banister P. Burman E. Parker I. Taylor M. Tindall C. (1994). Qualitative methods in psychology: A research guide. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Bouzeghoub, A., & Do, N.-K. (2010). Active sharing of contextual learning experiences among users in personal learning environments using a peer-to-peer network. In Proceedings of the 2010 10th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 78-82). Ieee. doi:10.1109/ICALT.2010.29
Bunduchi, R., & Smart, A. U. (2010). Process innovation costs in supply networks: A synthesis. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(4), 365-383. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00269.x
Carlsson, C., Carlsson, J., Hyvonen, K., Puhakainen, J., & Walden, P. (2006). Adoption of mobile devices/services — Searching for answers with the UTAUT. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS06) (00(C), pp. 132a-132a). Ieee. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2006.38
Chatti M. A. Jarke M. Frosch-Wilke D. (2007). The future of e-learning: A shift to knowledge networking and social software.[Inderscience.]. Knowledge Creation Diffusion Utilization, 3(4), 404–420.
Chau P. Y. K. (1996). An empirical assessment of a modified technology acceptance model.[M.E. Sharpe Inc.]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(2), 185–204.
Chiu, C., & Wang, E. (2008). Understanding web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task value. Information & Management, 45(3), 194-201. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/j.im.2008.02.003
Davis F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology (MISQ 89).Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13, 319–339. 10.2307/249008
Fiedler S. H. D. Väljataga T. (2011). Personal learning environments: concept or technology? (in press).International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 2(4). 10.4018/jvple.2011100101
Fishbein M. Ajzen I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behaviour: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley.
Fruhmann, K., Nussbaumer, A., & Albert, D. (2010). A psycho-pedagogical framework for self-regulated learning in a responsive open learning environment. In S. Hambach, A. Martens, D. Tavangarian, & B. Urban (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference eLearning Baltics Science eLBa Science 2010 (pp. 1–2). Fraunhofer.
Glaser B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. The discovery of grounded theory (Vol. 193, pp. 41–47). Sociology Press.
Glaser B. G. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: emergence vs forcing. Emergence v forcing basics of grounded theory analysis (p. 128). Sociology Press.
Glaser B. G. Strauss A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. In GlaserB.StraussA. N. (Eds.), Observations (Vol. 1, p. 271). Aldine.
Hofmann D. W. (2002). Internet-based distance learning in higher education.Tech Directions, 62(1), 28–32.
Huang, T.-C., Cheng, S.-C., & Huang, Y.-M. (2009). A blog article recommendation generating mechanism using an SBACPSO algorithm. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(7), 10388-10396. Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2009.01.039
Igbaria M. (1990). End-user computing effectiveness: A structural equation model.Omega, 18(6), 637–652. 10.1016/0305-0483(90)90055-E
Karahanna E. Straub D. W. Chervany N. L. (1999). Information technology adoption across time: A cross-sectional comparison of pre-adoption beliefs and post-adoption beliefs.Management Information Systems Quarterly, 23(2), 183–213. 10.2307/249751
Lewis W. Agarwal R. Sambamurthy V. (2003). Sources of influence on beliefs about IT use: An empirical study of knowledge workers.Management Information Systems Quarterly, 27(4), 657–679.
Li, J. P., & Kishore, R. (2006). How robust is the UTAUT instrument? In Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGMIS CPR Conference on Computer Personnel Research Forty Four Years of Computer Personnel Research Achievements Challenges the Future (SIGMIS CPR 06) (p. 183). ACM Press. doi:10.1145/1125170.1125218
Miles M. B. Huberman A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (Vol. 2, p. 352). Sage Publications.
Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222. INFORMS: Institute for Operations Research. doi:10.1287/isre.2.3.192
Patton M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. In StallingsR. (Ed.), Qualitative inquiry (Vol. 3, p. 598). Sage Publications.
Reardon R. F. (2010). The impact of learning culture on worker response to new technology.Journal of Workplace Learning, 22(4), 201–211. 10.1108/13665621011040662
Rogers E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. In StacksD. W.SalwenM. B. (Eds.), An integrated approach to communication theory and research (Vol. 65, p. 519). Free Press.
Schaper, L., & Pervan, G. (2007). An investigation of factors affecting technology acceptance and use decisions by Australian allied health therapists. In R. H. J. Sprague (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2007 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS07) (pp. 141-141). Ieee. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2007.69
Segars, A. H., & Grover, V. (1993). Re-examining perceived ease of use and usefulness: A confirmatory factor analysis. MIS Quarterly, 17(4), 517-525. MIS Quarterly & The Society for Information Management. doi:10.2307/249590
Shih H. (2006). Technology-push and communication-pull forces driving message-based coordination performance.The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 15(2), 105–123. 10.1016/j.jsis.2005.08.004
Steffens, K. (2006). Self-regulated learning in technology-enhanced learning environments: Lessons of a European peer review. European Journal of Education, 41(3-4), 353-379. Wiley Online Library. doi:10.1111/j.1465-3435.2006.00271.x
Strauss A. Corbin J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. In CorbinJ. M. (Ed.), Sage Publications.
Tan M. Teo T. S. H. (2000). Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking.Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 1(1), 1–42.
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A Test of Competing Models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144-176. Institute for Operations Research. doi:10.1287/isre.6.2.144
Thuemmler C. Buchanan W. J. Fekri H. Lawson A. (2009). Radio frequency identification (RFID) in pervasive healthcare.International Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management, 10, 119–131. 10.1504/IJHTM.2009.023731
Venkatesh, Viswanath, & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273-315. Blackwell Synergy. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186-204. INFORMS. doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
Venkatesh, V, Morris, M., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. JSTOR. doi:10.2307/30036540
Waarts, E., Van Everdingen, Y. M., & Van Hillegersberg, J. (2002). The dynamics of factors affecting the adoption of innovations. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(6), 412-423. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/S0737-6782(02)00175-3
Wang, Y.-S., Wu, M.-C., & Wang, H.-Y. (2009). Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 92-118. John Wiley & Sons. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00809.x
Wetzels M. (2003). To accept or not to accept. Is that the question?Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.
Wilson, S. (2008). Patterns of personal learning environments. In F. Wild, M. Kalz, M. Palmér, & D. Müller (Eds.), Interactive Learning Environments, 16(1), 17-34. Routledge. doi:10.1080/10494820701772660
Wilson S. Velayutham K. (2009). Creating an innovation-oriented technology strategy.Horizon, 17(3), 245–255. 10.1108/10748120910993277
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329-339. American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329

Request Access

You do not own this content. Please login to recommend this title to your institution's librarian or purchase it from the IGI Global bookstore.