Age

The framework of Age is studied in two parts, Grade and Division. Here Grade means the grade the students study at, could be grade 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. And division is the division the students belong to, could be elementary, junior high, or senior high.

4.1.1.1. Grade

The results of descriptive statistics on perceived usefulness of e-Learning (PU), perceived easy of use of e-Learning (PEU), attitude towards e-Learning (Att), and intention to the usage of e-Learning (Int) of students of each grade are listed in Table 4-1.

Table 4-1 Descriptive Statistics on Grade

PU PEU Att Int

Grade

X ^s X ^s X ^s X ^s

sample numbers

% of population

6 4.9510 1.44 5.0857 1.12 5.1224 2.31 5.1633 2.79 49 26.92%

7 5.0974 1.11 5.1949 0.86 5.3846 1.26 5.2308 2.23 39 21.43%

8 4.4125 1.12 4.7063 0.82 4.5625 2.06 4.5938 2.05 32 17.58%

9 4.3300 1.56 4.9200 1.47 4.7000 2.41 5.0500 2.45 20 10.99%

10 4.5875 0.43 4.8875 0.65 4.8125 1.53 5.3125 1.71 16 8.79%

11 4.4667 0.61 4.7333 0.73 4.6667 1.42 4.7333 1.00 15 8.24%

12 4.8545 0.60 5.0000 1.43 4.4545 1.16 4.5455 1.34 11 6.04%

All 4.742 1.20 4.9725 1.03 4.9286 1.95 5.0055 2.25 182 100.00%

Average 4.6714 4.9325 4.8148 4.9470 X: average

s: standard deviation

We can notice that there are no obvious tendency found between grade and the items in Table 4-1. However, the average score of all students in every item is above 4.7 and is about 5. It shows that the students’ average opinion is agreeing e-Learning. In most of items (PU, PEU, Att), grade 7 students have the highest average scores but the standard deviations are large also. And in the item of intention of usage of e-Learning (Int), grade10 students have the highest average score but the standard deviation is large, too.

4.1.1.2. Division

The results of descriptive statistics on perceived usefulness of e-Learning (PU), perceived easy of use of e-Learning (PEU), attitude towards e-Learning (Att), and intention to the usage of e-Learning (Int) of students of each division are listed below in Table 4-2. Here we have E.

for elementary school, include grade 6; J.H. for junior high school, include grade 7 to 9; and S.H. for senior high school, include grade 10-12.

Table 4-2 Descriptive Statistics on Division

PU PEU Att Int

Divi-

sion X ^s X ^s X ^s X ^s

sample numbers

% of population

E. 4.9510 1.44 5.0857 1.12 5.1224 2.31 5.1633 2.79 49 26.92%

J.H. 4.6879 1.12 4.9626 0.82 4.9451 2.06 4.9670 2.05 91 50.00%

S.H. 4.6143 0.56 4.8619 0.89 4.6667 1.41 4.9048 1.47 42 23.08%

Total 182 100.00%

Average 4.7511 4.9701 4.9114 5.0117

X:average

s: standard deviation

In comparison with the results in the former section, we found more consistence exist in divisions rather than in grades. As shown in the table, we can see the division of lower grade has higher average scores in all items but, except in the item of PEU, where we see a smaller standard deviation (0.82) for junior high students than senior high students’ (0.89), the trend is the grade higher, the standard deviation smaller. This may indicate that students of the higher division have more similar opinions about e-Learning and the lower division students

have more preference for e-Learning.

4.1.2. Social Influence

In the framework of social influence, an indirect way of surveying is applied. In the questionnaire, we did not ask the students to scale the influence from their peers or concerned adults, instead, we ask about internet behaviors and ideas of the peers and adults that the students observed. In this study, peers include students’ classmates and friends, and adults include their parents and other important adults which is opened to the students to fill in (question 3-5, 4-5, 5-5). And the answers are, in the order of present times: aunt (47 times), uncle (42 times), teacher (20 times), grandfather (12 times), grandmother (10 times), and neighbor (1 time). The students did not offer the answers are sorted to “no opinion”. Next, we check students with high perceived usefulness of e-Learning have higher or lower average score of peers’ internet usage than those with low perceived usefulness to see the relationship between students’ perceived usefulness of e-Learning and peers’ internet usage. And this way is used to other items as below.

4.1.2.1. Perceived Usefulness versus Peers’ Influence and Adults’ Influence

We separate all students scale their perceived usefulness of e-Learning above 4 points (not include 4, which means “no opinion”) into high-perceived-usefulness (High_PU) group and the others into low- perceived-usefulness (Low_PU) group.See the average scores of peers’

internet usage (Peer_Usage), peers’ perceived usefulness (Peer_PU), peers’ perceived easy of use (Peer_PEU), and the standard deviation of each item, we find the relationship between students’ perceived usefulness (PU) and peers’ influence.

In the same way, we survey the relationship between students’ usefulness (PU) and adults’

influence by computing average scores and standard deviations of adults’ internet usage (Adult_Usage), adults’ perceived usefulness (Adult_PU), adults’ perceived easy of use (Adult_PEU). The results of descriptive statistics on students’ perceived usefulness versus social influence are listed in Table 4-3.

The average scores and standard deviations of students’ perceived usefulness (PU), the average grade of each group (avg_Grade) are together shown in the table, and so do the students’ e-Learning usage (Usage), students’ perceived easy of use (PEU), students’ attitude towards e-Learning (Att), students’ intention of usage of e-Learning (Int), for reference.

Table 4-3 Descriptive Statistics on Perceived Usefulness vs. Social Influence

Group PU avg_

It is found that 73% of students scaled higher than 4 points out of 7 on the PU item of their questionnaire means most of students agree that e-Learning is useful. And students of both High_PU and Low_PU groups have small standard deviations, shows that they are very different in their perceived usefulness of e-Learning. Though High_PU group students’

average scores of social influence no matter from peer or adults are a little higher than those of the Low_PU group, the trend is not clear since the XHigh/ Low number is close to 1.

4.1.2.2. Perceived Easy of Use versus Peers’ Influence and Adults’ Influence

As well, we separate students scale more than 4 points (not include 4) in perceived usefulness of e-Learning item into high-perceived-easy-of-use (High_PEU) group, and the others into low-perceived-easy-of-use (Low_PEU) group. We can see relationship between students’

PEU and peers’ influence by the average scores of peers’ internet usage (Peer_Usage), peers’

perceived usefulness (Peer_PU), peers’ perceived easy of use (Peer_PEU), and the standard deviation of each item.

Similarly, the relationship between students’ PEU and adults’ influence can be obtained by checking the average scores and standard deviations of adults’ internet usage (Adult_Usage), adults’ perceived usefulness (Adult_PU), and adults’ perceived easy of use (Adult_PEU).

The results of descriptive statistics on students’ perceived easy of use versus social influence are listed in Table 4-4.

Together, the average scores and standard deviations of students’ perceived easy of use (PEU), the average grade of each group (avg_Grade) are shown in the table, so do the students’

e-Learning usage (Usage), students’ perceived usefulness (PU), students’ attitude towards e-Learning (Att), students’ intention of usage of e-Learning (Int), for reference.

Table 4-4 Descriptive Statistics on Perceived Esay of Use vs. Social Influence Group PEU avg_

Group PEU avg_

Grade Usage PU Att Int ^sample

numbers

% of population

X 5.3301 7.9720 4.9668 4.9734 5.2168 5.3147 143 78.57%

High_PEU

s 0.64 3.33 0.89 0.96 1.55 1.81

Low_PEU X 3.6615 8.2051 4.1346 3.8923 3.8718 3.8718 39 21.43%

High_PEU X 5.5979 4.9476 5.2517 4.0210 4.5688 4.5198 143 78.57%

s 1.35 0.98 1.16 1.21 1.34 1.06

Low_PEU X 5.1282 4.7051 4.3974 3.2735 4.3761 4.0598 39 21.43%

s 1.93 1.59 1.77 1.69 1.33 1.75

total 182 100.00%

X

High/ Low

1.09 1.05 1.19 1.23 1.04 1.11

XHigh/ Low: X of High_PEU group/ X Low_PEU group X:average

s: standard deviation

It is found that 78% of students scaled higher than 4 points out of 7 on the PEU item of their questionnaire means most of students agree that e-Learning is easy to use. Both groups have standard deviations less than 1, Low_PEU group even has a standard deviation of only 0.27.

And the High_PEU average PEU score is 1.46 times of that of Low_PEU group. It indicates that there are nearly 1/5 of students do not feel easy in interacting with the e-Learning programs, or computers. Noticeably, High_PEU group students’ average scores of adults’

internet usage (Adult_Usage) is much higher (1.23 times) than that of the Low_PEU group, though the standard deviation is not small, it might release the message that high adults’

internet usage relative to students’ high perceived easy of use of e-Learning.

4.1.2.3. Attitude versus Peers’ Influence and Adults’ Influence

Students split into high-attitude-towards-e-Learning (High_Att) group and low-attitude- towards-e-Learning (Low_Att) group by 4 points out of 7.

Research the relationship between students’ attitude and peers’ influence by seeing the average scores of peers’ internet usage (Peer_Usage), peers’ perceived usefulness (Peer_PU),

peers’ perceived easy of use (Peer_PEU), and the standard deviation of each item

Relationship between students’ attitude and adults’ influence, then, is surveyed by checking the average and standard deviations of adults’ internet usage (Adult_Usage), adults’ perceived usefulness (Adult_PU), and adults’ perceived easy of use (Adult_PEU).

Results on students’ attitude versus social influence are listed in Table 4-5.

The average scores and standard deviations of students’ attitude towards e-Learning (Att), the average grade of each group (avg_Grade), students’ e-Learning usage (Usage), students’

perceived usefulness (PU), students’ perceived easy of use (PEU), and students’ intention of usage of e-Learning (Int) are together shown in the table for reference.

Table 4-5 Descriptive Statistics on Attitude vs. Social Influence Group Att avg_

XHigh/ Low: X of High_Att group/ X Low_Att group X:average

s: standard deviation

The rate of students with high attitude towards e-Learning and those with low attitude is about 60:40 in numbers. And the high attitude group students are younger in average. Both groups have standard deviation less than 1, and the High_Att group average score is 1.63 times to that of Low_Att group, indicates that students of two groups have very clear different attitude towards e-Learning. But social influence relative items’ (Peer_Usage, Peer_PU, Peer_PEU, Adult_Usage, Adult_PU, and Adult_PEU) XHigh/ Low values are all close to 1, that is, can not find their relationship in this table.

4.1.2.4. Intention versus Peers’ Influence and Adults’ Influence

Follow the same model, students split into intention of high-intention-of-usage-of-e-Learning (High_Int) group and low-intention-of-usage-of-e-Learning (Low_Int) group by 4 points on the 7-point-scale.

The relationship between students’ intention and peers’ influence can be found by seeing the average scores and the standard deviation of peers’ internet usage (Peer_Usage), peers’

perceived usefulness (Peer_PU), peers’ perceived easy of use (Peer_PEU).

Also, the relationship between students’ intention and adults’ influence can be found by checking the average scores and standard deviations of adults’ internet usage (Adult_Usage), adults’ perceived usefulness (Adult_PU), and adults’ perceived easy of use (Adult_PEU).

The results of descriptive statistics on students’ intention of usage of e-Learning versus social influence are listed in Table 4-6.

The average scores and standard deviations of students’ intention of usage of e-Learning (Int), the average grade of each group (avg_Grade), the students’ e-Learning usage (Usage), students’ perceived usefulness (PU), students’ perceived easy of use (PEU), and students’

attitude towards e-Learning (Att) are also shown in this table for reference.

Table 4-6 Descriptive Statistics on Intention of Usage vs. Social Influence Group Int avg_

Grade Usage PU PEU Att ^sample

numbers

% of population

High_Int X ^5.9043 7.7739 5.0522 5.1374 5.3078 5.5739 115 63.19%

s 0.75 3.01 0.82 0.99 0.87 1.24

Just like the result of former section, the rate of students with high intention of usage of e-Learning and those with low intention is also about 60:40 in numbers. And the high intention group students are also younger in average.

Only High_Int group have standard deviation less than 1, the Low_Int group’s standard deviation is 1.05. The High_Att group average score is 1.71 times to that of Low_Att group.

Thus we can infer that high-intention-of-usage-of-e-Learning-group students have much stronger intention of e-Learning usage than those of low-intention group.

But, again, the social influence relative items’ (Peer_Usage, Peer_PU, Peer_PEU, Adult_Usage, Adult_PU, and Adult_PEU) XHigh/ Low values are all close to 1, that is, can

not find their relationship here.

4.1.3. A Brief Summary

From descriptive statistics in section 4.1, we have some findings:

„ Finding 4.1.1: More than 73% students have high perceived usefulness of e-Learning and high perceived easy of use of e-Learning; and more than 62% students have high attitude towards e-Learning and high intention of usage of e-Learning. It shows that adolescents have high acceptance to e-Learning.

„ Finding 4.1.2: Student’s average scores of perceived usefulness of e-Learning (PU), perceived easy of use of e-Learning (PEU), attitude towards e-Learning (Att), and intention of usage of e-Learning (Int) having more consistency in divisions than in grades.

„ Finding 4.1.3: Students of lower division have higher average scores for perceived usefulness of e-Learning (PU), perceived easy of use (PEU), attitude towards e-Learning (Att), and intention of usage of e-Learning (Int).

„ Finding 4.1.4: High-perceived-usefulness group (High_PU) and low-perceived- usefulness group (Low_PU) have small standard deviations (0.57 and 0.41)

„ Finding 4.1.5: Students of high-perceived-easy-of-use (High_PEU) group have much higher (1.23 :1) average score on adults’ internet usage (Adult_Usage) item than that of the low-perceived-easy-of-use (Low_PEU) group. And both groups’ standard deviations are small (0.64 and 0.27).

„ Finding 4.1.6: Students of low-perceived-easy-of-use (Low_PEU) group make up about 1/5 of all students have very small standard deviation (0.27) in the scores on the perceived-easy-of-use item, and the average score is much smaller (1: 1.46) than that of high-perceived-easy-of-use (High_PEU) group.

„ Finding 4.1.7: Students of high-attitude-towards-e-Learning (High_Att) group have small standard deviation (0.79) in the scores and the average score is much larger (1.63 :1) than that of low-attitude-towards-e-Learning (Low_Att) group which also has a small standard deviation of 0.75.

„ Finding 4.1.8: Students of high-intention-of-usage-of e-Learning (High_Int) group have small standard (0.75) deviation in the scores, and the average score is much larger (1.71 :1) than that of low-intention-of-usage-of-e-Learning (Low_Int) group.

4.2 Age

In this section we check the relationship between students’ age and perceived usefulness of e-Learning (PU), perceived easy of use of e-Learning (PEU), attitude towards e-Learning (Att), and intention of the usage of e-Learning (Int) by checking the Pearson coefficients of correlation and t-statistics.

We work in two parts: grade and division. Grade means the grade the students study at, it could be grade 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. And division is the division the students belong to, it could be elementary, junior high, or senior high.