Reliability and Validity of An Instrument Modified Based on The TAM for Piano Learning
Abstract
This study aims to modify and assess the validity and reliability of an instrument designed to measure middle school students' perceptions of using a short video platform as an aid in piano learning. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) was chosen as the theoretical framework because it is a well-established model for assessing user acceptance of technology. The absence of instruments for assessing TAM-based attitudes limits a comprehensive understanding of students' acceptance and the effectiveness of these platforms. The instrument of the current study is based on the modified model by Lee et al. (2009) following the Learners' Acceptance of E-learning framework. Models of self-directed learning and perceived satisfaction are incorporated into the original framework (service quality constructs, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and behavioral intent to use). The instrument was distributed to 100 students and 95 valid responses were returned. Instrument content was modified from the four established instruments from past studies and exploratory factor analysis was used to determine the construct validity. The reliability of each construct was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha, and the internal consistency of individual items within each construct was assessed using Corrected Item-Total Correlation (CITC). The findings indicate that the Cronbach's alpha values for all constructs were between 0.812 and 0.9, which ensures their internal reliability. Ultimately, 33 out of 36 items are retained. The results indicate that the instrument is valid and reliable.
Downloads
References
Alomair, A. M. (2021). Saudi Arabian University Students’ Perceptions of Engagement and Self-Directed Learning when Using Smartphones (Doctoral dissertation, Concordia University Chicago).
Chou, T. C. R. (2014). A Scale of university students' attitudes toward e-learning on the moodle system. International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design (IJOPCD), 4(3), 49-65.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340.
de Winter, J. C., Dodou, D. I. M. I. T. R. A., & Wieringa, P. A. (2009). Exploratory factor analysis with small sample sizes. Multivariate behavioral research, 44(2), 147-181.
De Winter, J. C., & Dodou, D. (2012). Factor recovery by principal axis factoring and maximum likelihood factor analysis as a function of factor pattern and sample size. Journal of applied statistics, 39(4), 695-710.
Deng, Y., Guo, H., Meng, M., Zhang, Y., & Pei, S. (2020). Exploring the effects of safety climate on worker’s safety behavior in subway operation. Sustainability, 12(20), 8310.
Estriegana, R., Medina-Merodio, J. A., & Barchino, R. (2019). Student acceptance of virtual laboratory and practical work: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Computers & Education, 135, 1-14.
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American journal of theoretical and applied statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
Griep, R. H., Rotenberg, L., Vasconcellos, A. G. G., Landsbergis, P., Comaru, C. M., & Alves, M. G. M. (2009). The psychometric properties of demand-control and effort–reward imbalance scales among Brazilian nurses. International archives of occupational and environmental health, 82, 1163-1172.
He, H. (2020). Research on Dissemination Channels and New Media Integration for Traditional Folk Dances of Lingnan. International Journal of Social Science, Innovation and Educational Technologies (online), 1(3), 346-350.
Hinkin, T. R. (1998). A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organizational research methods, 1(1), 104-121.
Howard, M. C. (2016). A review of exploratory factor analysis decisions and overview of current practices: What we are doing and how can we improve?. International journal of human-computer interaction, 32(1), 51-62.
Hughes, J., & Kwok, O. M. (2007). Influence of student-teacher and parent-teacher relationships on lower achieving readers' engagement and achievement in the primary grades. Journal of educational psychology, 99(1), 39.
Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and psychological measurement, 20(1), 141-151.
Khan, M. A., Nabi, M. K., Khojah, M., & Tahir, M. (2020). Students’ perception towards e-learning during COVID-19 pandemic in India: An empirical study. Sustainability, 13(1), 57.
Kruse, N. B., & Veblen, K. K. (2012). Music teaching and learning online: Considering YouTube instructional videos. Journal of Music, Technology & Education, 5(1), 77-87.
Lee, B. C., Yoon, J. O., & Lee, I. (2009). Learners’ acceptance of e-learning in South Korea: Theories and results. Computers & education, 53(4), 1320-1329.
Liaw, S. S. (2008). Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioral intention, and effectiveness of e-learning: A case study of the Blackboard system. Computers & education, 51(2), 864-873.
Ma, R., & Ma, R. (2023). Piano education online: Challenges and solutions. Education and information technologies, 28(2), 1359-1372.
Martínez-Torres, M. D. R., Toral Marín, S. L., García, F. B., Vázquez, S. G., Oliva, M. A., & Torres, T. (2008). A technological acceptance of e-learning tools used in practical and laboratory teaching, according to the European higher education area. Behaviour & Information Technology, 27(6), 495-505.
McFarland, L. A., & Ployhart, R. E. (2015). Social media: A contextual framework to guide research and practice. Journal of applied psychology, 100(6), 1653.
McHorney, C. A., Ware Jr, J. E., Lu, J. R., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1994). The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Medical care, 40-66.
Pal, D., & Triyason, T. (2018). User Intention towards a Music Streaming Service: A Thailand Case Study. KnE Social Sciences, 3(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i1.1393
Rangarajan, K., Begg, K., & Somani, B. (2019). Online digital media: The uptake of YouTube-based digital clinical education (DCE). American journal of distance education, 33(2), 142-150. https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/430947/
Rozaq, M., & Nugrahani, R. U. (2023). Penggunaan Platform Video Pendek Sebagai Strategi Komunikasi Pemasaran Digital untuk UMKM. Jurnal Komunikasi Nusantara. 5(1). 21-30. https://jkn.unitri.ac.id/index.php/jkn/article/view/271
Sapnas, K. G., & Zeller, R. A. (2002). Minimizing sample size when using exploratory factor analysis for measurement. Journal of nursing measurement, 10(2), 135-154.
Suhr, D. (2006). Exploratory or Confirmatory Factor Analysis? Proceedings of the 31st Annual SAS? Users Group International Conference (pp. 200-31). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Ullman, J. B. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (Vol. 6, pp. 497-516). Boston, MA: pearson.
Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in science education, 48(6), 1273-1296.
Tinsley, H. E., & Brown, S. D. (2000). Multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling. In Handbook of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 3-36). Academic Press.
Yong, A. G., & Pearce, S. (2013). A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: Focusing on exploratory factor analysis. Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology, 9(2), 79-94.
Yu, J. N. (2023). Research on the Challenges and Solutions for Online Physical Education in the Post Epidemic Era. Advances in Physical Education, 13, 180-194. https://doi.org/10.4236/ape.2023.133016
