May14 by Editor IJITCE

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014

UK: Managing Editor International Journal of Innovative Technology and Creative Engineering 1a park lane, Cranford London TW59WA UK E-Mail: editor@ijitce.co.uk Phone: +44-773-043-0249 USA: Editor International Journal of Innovative Technology and Creative Engineering Dr. Arumugam Department of Chemistry University of Georgia GA-30602, USA. Phone: 001-706-206-0812 Fax:001-706-542-2626 India: Editor International Journal of Innovative Technology & Creative Engineering Dr. Arthanariee. A. M Finance Tracking Center India 17/14 Ganapathy Nagar 2nd Street Ekkattuthangal Chennai -600032 Mobile: 91-7598208700

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014

IJITCE PUBLICATION

International Journal of Innovative Technology & Creative Engineering Vol.4 No.5 May 2014

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014

From Editor's Desk Dear Researcher, Greetings! Research article in this issue discusses about motivational factor analysis. Let us review research around the world this month; Researchers in California have identified a plausible biomarker that can be used to predict long-term MS progression. Using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), researchers measured metabolite abnormalities known to be associated with neurodegeneration. N-acetylaspartate (NAA) is an amino acid generated by mitochondria that is confined almost exclusively to neurons and axons in the CNS. A reduction of NAA will occur when there is loss of neurons and axons—thus reflecting neurodegeneration—but may also decrease when there is potentially reversible neuroaxonal dysfunction. Myo-inositol (mI) is generated by glial cells, in particular astrocytes. An increase of mI in white matter lesions and normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) in MS may reflect astrocyte proliferation. International Energy Agency (IEA), published Monday, looks at the cost of converting to green electricity in order to keep global warming below 2 °C. The agency found that it will cost $44 trillion more than keeping the current mix, where most electricity comes from fossil fuels. The extra money will go on building wind and solar power stations, efficient grids, electric vehicles and infrastructure. Although going green costs more upfront, it brings long-term savings. That is primarily because a more efficient infrastructure uses less fuel. The IEA says that, at $115 trillion by 2050, those savings more than offset the initial investment. Google unveils design for its own self-driving car. Revealed at the inaugural Code Conference in California this week, Google's two-person driverless car is an all-electric design with a top speed of 25 miles an hour. It incorporates a range of pedestrian, road and environmental sensing technologies based on lasers, radar and cameras. The firm has perfected these during 1 million kilometres of autonomous driving tests on the streets of California.Driverless operation seems to be a natural evolution of current systems like lane-keeping technology, adaptive cruise control and selfparking, which can all be activated at the touch of a button. It has been an absolute pleasure to present you articles that you wish to read. We look forward to many more new technologies related research articles from you and your friends. We are anxiously awaiting the rich and thorough research papers that have been prepared by our authors for the next issue.

Thanks, Editorial Team IJITCE

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014

Editorial Members Dr. Chee Kyun Ng Ph.D Department of Computer and Communication Systems, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia,UPM Serdang, 43400 Selangor,Malaysia. Dr. Simon SEE Ph.D Chief Technologist and Technical Director at Oracle Corporation, Associate Professor (Adjunct) at Nanyang Technological University Professor (Adjunct) at Shangai Jiaotong University, 27 West Coast Rise #08-12,Singapore 127470 Dr. sc.agr. Horst Juergen SCHWARTZ Ph.D, Humboldt-University of Berlin, Faculty of Agriculture and Horticulture, Asternplatz 2a, D-12203 Berlin, Germany Dr. Marco L. Bianchini Ph.D Italian National Research Council; IBAF-CNR, Via Salaria km 29.300, 00015 Monterotondo Scalo (RM), Italy Dr. Nijad Kabbara Ph.D Marine Research Centre / Remote Sensing Centre/ National Council for Scientific Research, P. O. Box: 189 Jounieh, Lebanon Dr. Aaron Solomon Ph.D Department of Computer Science, National Chi Nan University, No. 303, University Road, Puli Town, Nantou County 54561, Taiwan Dr. Arthanariee. A. M M.Sc.,M.Phil.,M.S.,Ph.D Director - Bharathidasan School of Computer Applications, Ellispettai, Erode, Tamil Nadu,India Dr. Takaharu KAMEOKA, Ph.D Professor, Laboratory of Food, Environmental & Cultural Informatics Division of Sustainable Resource Sciences, Graduate School of Bioresources, Mie University, 1577 Kurimamachiya-cho, Tsu, Mie, 514-8507, Japan Mr. M. Sivakumar M.C.A.,ITIL.,PRINCE2.,ISTQB.,OCP.,ICP Project Manager - Software, Applied Materials, 1a park lane, cranford, UK Dr. Bulent Acma Ph.D Anadolu University, Department of Economics, Unit of Southeastern Anatolia Project(GAP), 26470 Eskisehir, TURKEY Dr. Selvanathan Arumugam Ph.D Research Scientist, Department of Chemistry, University of Georgia, GA-30602, USA.

Review Board Members Dr. Paul Koltun Senior Research ScientistLCA and Industrial Ecology Group,Metallic & Ceramic Materials,CSIRO Process Science & Engineering Private Bag 33, Clayton South MDC 3169,Gate 5 Normanby Rd., Clayton Vic. 3168, Australia Dr. Zhiming Yang MD., Ph. D. Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Science,1550 Orleans Street Rm 441, Baltimore MD, 21231,USA Dr. Jifeng Wang Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois, 61801, USA Dr. Giuseppe Baldacchini ENEA - Frascati Research Center, Via Enrico Fermi 45 - P.O. Box 65,00044 Frascati, Roma, ITALY. Dr. Mutamed Turki Nayef Khatib Assistant Professor of Telecommunication Engineering,Head of Telecommunication Engineering Department,Palestine Technical University (Kadoorie), Tul Karm, PALESTINE.

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 Dr.P.Uma Maheswari Prof & Head,Depaartment of CSE/IT, INFO Institute of Engineering,Coimbatore. Dr. T. Christopher, Ph.D., Assistant Professor & Head,Department of Computer Science,Government Arts College(Autonomous),Udumalpet, India. Dr. T. DEVI Ph.D. Engg. (Warwick, UK), Head,Department of Computer Applications,Bharathiar University,Coimbatore-641 046, India. Dr. Renato J. orsato Professor at FGV-EAESP,Getulio Vargas Foundation,São Paulo Business School,Rua Itapeva, 474 (8° andar),01332-000, São Paulo (SP), Brazil Visiting Scholar at INSEAD,INSEAD Social Innovation Centre,Boulevard de Constance,77305 Fontainebleau - France Y. Benal Yurtlu Assist. Prof. Ondokuz Mayis University Dr.Sumeer Gul Assistant Professor,Department of Library and Information Science,University of Kashmir,India Dr. Chutima Boonthum-Denecke, Ph.D Department of Computer Science,Science & Technology Bldg., Rm 120,Hampton University,Hampton, VA 23688 Dr. Renato J. Orsato Professor at FGV-EAESP,Getulio Vargas Foundation,São Paulo Business SchoolRua Itapeva, 474 (8° andar),01332-000, São Paulo (SP), Brazil Dr. Lucy M. Brown, Ph.D. Texas State University,601 University Drive,School of Journalism and Mass Communication,OM330B,San Marcos, TX 78666 Javad Robati Crop Production Departement,University of Maragheh,Golshahr,Maragheh,Iran Vinesh Sukumar (PhD, MBA) Product Engineering Segment Manager, Imaging Products, Aptina Imaging Inc. Dr. Binod Kumar PhD(CS), M.Phil.(CS), MIAENG,MIEEE HOD & Associate Professor, IT Dept, Medi-Caps Inst. of Science & Tech.(MIST),Indore, India Dr. S. B. Warkad Associate Professor, Department of Electrical Engineering, Priyadarshini College of Engineering, Nagpur, India Dr. doc. Ing. Rostislav Choteborský, Ph.D. Katedra materiálu a strojírenské technologie Technická fakulta,Ceská zemedelská univerzita v Praze,Kamýcká 129, Praha 6, 165 21 Dr. Paul Koltun Senior Research ScientistLCA and Industrial Ecology Group,Metallic & Ceramic Materials,CSIRO Process Science & Engineering Private Bag 33, Clayton South MDC 3169,Gate 5 Normanby Rd., Clayton Vic. 3168 DR.Chutima Boonthum-Denecke, Ph.D Department of Computer Science,Science & Technology Bldg.,Hampton University,Hampton, VA 23688 Mr. Abhishek Taneja B.sc(Electronics),M.B.E,M.C.A.,M.Phil., Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Science & Applications, at Dronacharya Institute of Management and Technology, Kurukshetra. (India). Dr. Ing. Rostislav Chotěborský,ph.d, Katedra materiálu a strojírenské technologie, Technická fakulta,Česká zemědělská univerzita v Praze,Kamýcká 129, Praha 6, 165 21

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 Dr. Amala VijayaSelvi Rajan, B.sc,Ph.d, Faculty – Information Technology Dubai Women’s College – Higher Colleges of Technology,P.O. Box – 16062, Dubai, UAE

Naik Nitin Ashokrao B.sc,M.Sc Lecturer in Yeshwant Mahavidyalaya Nanded University Dr.A.Kathirvell, B.E, M.E, Ph.D,MISTE, MIACSIT, MENGG Professor - Department of Computer Science and Engineering,Tagore Engineering College, Chennai Dr. H. S. Fadewar B.sc,M.sc,M.Phil.,ph.d,PGDBM,B.Ed. Associate Professor - Sinhgad Institute of Management & Computer Application, Mumbai-Banglore Westernly Express Way Narhe, Pune - 41 Dr. David Batten Leader, Algal Pre-Feasibility Study,Transport Technologies and Sustainable Fuels,CSIRO Energy Transformed Flagship Private Bag 1,Aspendale, Vic. 3195,AUSTRALIA Dr R C Panda (MTech & PhD(IITM);Ex-Faculty (Curtin Univ Tech, Perth, Australia))Scientist CLRI (CSIR), Adyar, Chennai - 600 020,India Miss Jing He PH.D. Candidate of Georgia State University,1450 Willow Lake Dr. NE,Atlanta, GA, 30329 Jeremiah Neubert Assistant Professor,Mechanical Engineering,University of North Dakota Hui Shen Mechanical Engineering Dept,Ohio Northern Univ. Dr. Xiangfa Wu, Ph.D. Assistant Professor / Mechanical Engineering,NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY Seraphin Chally Abou Professor,Mechanical & Industrial Engineering Depart,MEHS Program, 235 Voss-Kovach Hall,1305 Ordean Court,Duluth, Minnesota 55812-3042 Dr. Qiang Cheng, Ph.D. Assistant Professor,Computer Science Department Southern Illinois University CarbondaleFaner Hall, Room 2140-Mail Code 45111000 Faner Drive, Carbondale, IL 62901 Dr. Carlos Barrios, PhD Assistant Professor of Architecture,School of Architecture and Planning,The Catholic University of America Y. Benal Yurtlu Assist. Prof. Ondokuz Mayis University Dr. Lucy M. Brown, Ph.D. Texas State University,601 University Drive,School of Journalism and Mass Communication,OM330B,San Marcos, TX 78666 Dr. Paul Koltun Senior Research ScientistLCA and Industrial Ecology Group,Metallic & Ceramic Materials CSIRO Process Science & Engineering Dr.Sumeer Gul Assistant Professor,Department of Library and Information Science,University of Kashmir,India Dr. Chutima Boonthum-Denecke, Ph.D Department of Computer Science,Science & Technology Bldg., Rm 120,Hampton University,Hampton, VA 23688

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 Dr. Renato J. Orsato Professor at FGV-EAESP,Getulio Vargas Foundation,S찾o Paulo Business School,Rua Itapeva, 474 (8째 andar)01332-000, S찾o Paulo (SP), Brazil Dr. Wael M. G. Ibrahim Department Head-Electronics Engineering Technology Dept.School of Engineering Technology ECPI College of Technology 5501 Greenwich Road Suite 100,Virginia Beach, VA 23462 Dr. Messaoud Jake Bahoura Associate Professor-Engineering Department and Center for Materials Research Norfolk State University,700 Park avenue,Norfolk, VA 23504 Dr. V. P. Eswaramurthy M.C.A., M.Phil., Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Government Arts College(Autonomous), Salem-636 007, India. Dr. P. Kamakkannan,M.C.A., Ph.D ., Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Government Arts College(Autonomous), Salem-636 007, India. Dr. V. Karthikeyani Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Government Arts College(Autonomous), Salem-636 008, India. Dr. K. Thangadurai Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science, Government Arts College ( Autonomous ), Karur - 639 005,India. Dr. N. Maheswari Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of MCA, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, SRM University, Kattangulathur, Kanchipiram Dt - 603 203, India. Mr. Md. Musfique Anwar B.Sc(Engg.) Lecturer, Computer Science & Engineering Department, Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Mrs. Smitha Ramachandran M.Sc(CS)., SAP Analyst, Akzonobel, Slough, United Kingdom. Dr. V. Vallimayil Ph.D., Director, Department of MCA, Vivekanandha Business School For Women, Elayampalayam, Tiruchengode - 637 205, India. Mr. M. Moorthi M.C.A., M.Phil., Assistant Professor, Department of computer Applications, Kongu Arts and Science College, India Prema Selvaraj Bsc,M.C.A,M.Phil Assistant Professor,Department of Computer Science,KSR College of Arts and Science, Tiruchengode Mr. G. Rajendran M.C.A., M.Phil., N.E.T., PGDBM., PGDBF., Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science, Government Arts College, Salem, India. Dr. Pradeep H Pendse B.E.,M.M.S.,Ph.d Dean - IT,Welingkar Institute of Management Development and Research, Mumbai, India Muhammad Javed Centre for Next Generation Localisation, School of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin 9, Ireland Dr. G. GOBI Assistant Professor-Department of Physics,Government Arts College,Salem - 636 007 Dr.S.Senthilkumar Post Doctoral Research Fellow, (Mathematics and Computer Science & Applications),Universiti Sains Malaysia,School of Mathematical Sciences, Pulau Pinang-11800,[PENANG],MALAYSIA.

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 Manoj Sharma Associate Professor Deptt. of ECE, Prannath Parnami Institute of Management & Technology, Hissar, Haryana, India RAMKUMAR JAGANATHAN Asst-Professor,Dept of Computer Science, V.L.B Janakiammal college of Arts & Science, Coimbatore,Tamilnadu, India Dr. S. B. Warkad Assoc. Professor, Priyadarshini College of Engineering, Nagpur, Maharashtra State, India Dr. Saurabh Pal Associate Professor, UNS Institute of Engg. & Tech., VBS Purvanchal University, Jaunpur, India Manimala Assistant Professor, Department of Applied Electronics and Instrumentation, St Joseph’s College of Engineering & Technology, Choondacherry Post, Kottayam Dt. Kerala -686579 Dr. Qazi S. M. Zia-ul-Haque Control Engineer Synchrotron-light for Experimental Sciences and Applications in the Middle East (SESAME),P. O. Box 7, Allan 19252, Jordan Dr. A. Subramani, M.C.A.,M.Phil.,Ph.D. Professor,Department of Computer Applications, K.S.R. College of Engineering, Tiruchengode - 637215 Dr. Seraphin Chally Abou Professor, Mechanical & Industrial Engineering Depart. MEHS Program, 235 Voss-Kovach Hall, 1305 Ordean Court Duluth, Minnesota 55812-3042 Dr. K. Kousalya Professor, Department of CSE,Kongu Engineering College,Perundurai-638 052 Dr. (Mrs.) R. Uma Rani Asso.Prof., Department of Computer Science, Sri Sarada College For Women, Salem-16, Tamil Nadu, India. MOHAMMAD YAZDANI-ASRAMI Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Babol "Noshirvani" University of Technology, Iran. Dr. Kulasekharan, N, Ph.D Technical Lead - CFD,GE Appliances and Lighting, GE India,John F Welch Technology Center, Plot # 122, EPIP, Phase 2,Whitefield Road,Bangalore – 560066, India. Dr. Manjeet Bansal Dean (Post Graduate),Department of Civil Engineering ,Punjab Technical University,Giani Zail Singh Campus, Bathinda -151001 (Punjab),INDIA Dr. Oliver Jukić Vice Dean for education, Virovitica College, Matije Gupca 78,33000 Virovitica, Croatia Dr. Lori A. Wolff, Ph.D., J.D. Professor of Leadership and Counselor Education, The University of Mississippi, Department of Leadership and Counselor Education, 139 Guyton University, MS 38677

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014

Contents Does self-efficacy effect on knowledge sharing intention in e-learning system? A motivational factor analysis in Open University Malaysia (OUM) by Dr. seyed mohammad bathaei, Seyed Ali Hosseini……………………….[206]

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014

Does self-efficacy effect on knowledge sharing intention in e-learning system? A motivational factor analysis in Open University Malaysia (OUM) Dr. seyed mohammad bathaei Ministry of education Islamic republic of Iran Deputy of minister of education in Islamic republic of Iran s_m_bathaei@yahoo.com Seyed Ali Hosseini International Business School University Technology Malaysia (UTM) Malaysia Jalan Semarak 50400 Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA -019-4616464 Sahosseini14@gmail.com I. INTRODUCTION

Abstract— The purpose of this paper is to examine the self-efficacy

factor

influence

intention

The

new

learning

methods

assist

cooperative

knowledge in E-Learning system within Open University

experience and virtual students’ society improvement

Malaysia (OUM). Moreover, its objective is to identify

(Bransford et al., 2000), and valuable knowledge via

the relationship between self-efficacy and perceived

knowledge sharing (Zhang et al., 2007). Nevertheless,

behaviour control (PBC) and intention to share in E-

these profits cannot be apprehended lacking of the

learning system. The current research expands a

energetic participation of people. Latest empirical

theoretical framework of online knowledge sharing

research disclose little points of participation and

factors with the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). An

unwillingness to share knowledge in EL systems and

online questionnaire survey was applied to collect data

environments (Carr and Chambers, 2006; Ng, 2001),

and the analysis was completed according to 583

and research of crucial factors influencing participation

responses from students who act in EL system of Open

in some systems disclose that this problem rests

University Malaysia (OUM). A semi-structured interview

unsolved (Xie et al., 2006). E-learning system structure

was

were

confirmed through constructivist theories of learning and

facilitators and teachers in EL system of OUM as the

behavior (Prawat, 1996), and assists learning process

case

sharing

via increasing knowledge sharing behavior in learning

comprehensible and understandable intention. The

environment (Honebein, 1996; Wilson, 1996). As Hiltz

outcomes of the study survey and interview support the

and

fundamental statement that self-efficacy direct

communicative procedure which gives enjoyment to

constructed

study

with

achieve

participants

who

knowledge

influence intention to share knowledge well.

Turoff

(2005)

referred,

‘‘EL

modern

distance learning students, compared to traditional classrooms (face to face)”. In spite of the attractiveness of the EL environments, there are still major challenges

Key words — knowledge sharing (KS), E-learning (EL), knowledge sharing behavior, theory of planned behavior (TPB), self-efficacy (SE), intention to share, perceived behavior control (PBC).

in the willingness to use EL systems, one of which is that the students do not want to share their knowledge and experiences (Zhang and Faerman, 2007).

206

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 Theory of planned Behaviour (TPB)

II. Operational definition Theory

E-Learning system

Planned

Behaviour

(Ajzen,

1985)

recognized as an advanced version of the theory reason EL systems are the principal learning surroundings in

action (TRA). Fishbein and Ajzen (1991) completed

Higher Education. EL is recognized as new applications

obligatory by the second representation ‘incapability to

by Learning Management System (LMS) and also

contract with Behaviours done which individuals have

Course Management System (CMS) in distance learning

imperfect optional control. TPB recognizes actual

universities and institutions (Artino, 2010). Kanuka and

performed Behaviour as a people's effort of a convinced

Rourke (2008) discover the modifications that are

Behaviour is performed by his or her/his intention to fulfil

happening in higher education (HE) as an outcome of

that Behaviour. Attitude towards the actual Behaviour,

the use of EL system. They find that some technical

Subjective Norm (SN) about involving in the Behaviour,

system prepares chances for developed accessibility,

and perceived Behaviour control (PBC) are supposed to

compatible with the objective in application of modern

impact intention and online learning by Behaviour in

technology in education environment. Nevertheless, it is

TPB producer (Baker and White, 2010). Moreover, a

also related to negative influences, as teachers and

number

learners experience to gather a lock of a feel of

substantial connection between SE and Perceived

belonging and responsiveness of borders.

Behavioural Control (PBC) based on TPB (Taylor and

current

researches

have

shown

the

Todd, 1995; Sheng and Noe, 2010) then SE can help Self-efficacy

turn the person's behaviour towards KS (Lin et al., 2009; Wasko and Faraj, 2005; Lin, 2007).

Self-efficacy indicates the degree of an individual’s confidence to perform and to coordinate the knowledge

Intention to Share Knowledge

and activities in daily educational tasks as required to obtain

knowledge,

experiences,

and

successful

performance in the EL system environment. As Ormrod (2006) defined it, “Self-Efficacy is the measure of the belief in one's own ability to complete tasks and reach goals". Bandura (1995) also believed that "Self-Efficacy is individual’s beliefs about their competencies to create

According to Ajzen (1991), the Intention is the most important

cause

sophisticated

purpose

people’s will

Behaviour. achieving

The certain

Behaviour, the advanced chances of the authentic enactment of that exact Behaviour. Perceived behaviour control (PBC)

success that impact on procedures growing their lives’ A suggestion is that PBC might be

PBC includes some features that affect the KS intention

divisible into two separate constituents. These would be

in producing the actual behaviour in terms of individual’s

“SE beliefs”, which is defined as the level of enactment

abilities, accessibility, skills, and feelings; also it is

of the behaviour which is easy or difficult for the

supposed that PBC is recognized by the whole complex

individual.

The next constituent is “perceived control

of accessible control beliefs (Ajzen, 1991). In this

over the behaviour”, which reveals the level at which the

research, PBC is associated with electronic materials,

individual perceives the enactment of his/her behaviour

accessibility to an EL system, a technical support

is under his/her control (Tavousi et al., 2009).

system as facility conditions, and self-efficacy in the use

performance".

of an EL system.

207

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 it validates the constructs that could be combined in the iii. Significant of the Study

online KS model.

Chiu et al. (2006) believed that the most important

IV. Research Questions

problem in predicating the online learning communities is the lock of contributions and willingness to share knowledge in the online communities. It is necessary to recognize the motivational factors in order to encourage students in performing and sharing their knowledge and experiences in learning environment (Ma, 2009; Ellis et

According to the statement of the research problem explained

before,

the

research

questions

have

developed the following questions: 1. Does self-efficacy influence on knowledge sharing intention in E-learning system?

al., 2002; Liu, 2008). Self-efficacy is the one of important factor that effects on knowledge sharing behavior (Lin et

V. Research Objectives

al., 2009; Wasko and Faraj, 2005; Lin, 2007; Chen et al., 2009). The current research creates empirical and theoretical contributions about SE and KS in EL

The purpose of the research is to discover the

environment.

empirical

relationship between the motivational knowledge sharing

consequences for on-line KS in an EL system. The

factors and intention to share knowledge in an EL

examination of the practical research of EL shows that a

system. In connection to this, the researcher’s other

few studies have been funded to increase KS by

purpose is to achieve the following objectives:

behavioral mechanisms like SE (Chen et al., 2009), 1.

To identify the influence of self-efficacy on knowledge

The

conclusions

have

such as the requirement of students to use the

sharing behaviour in E-learning system.

interactive connections between students in EL systems. Previous research has concentrated on gaps

VI. Research Hypotheses

interaction due to the lack of physicality or wave signals compared

with

face-to-face

communication.

Nevertheless, current, practical research indicates that the web is an intermediate instrument that encourages

The questions and objectives of the current study can be further studied through the following hypotheses: H1.

Behavioural Control in the EL system.

the quick construction of neighboring connections that support

the

above

period,

and

even

Self-Efficacy has a positive effect on Perceived

H2. Perceived Behavioural Control has a positive effect

promote

on the intention to share knowledge in the EL system.

involvement in the global geography. Prior EL and KS research has concentrated on the influence of technical factors on the adoption and continue behavior of EL and KS, and a have rarely explored the students’ selfefficacy

factor

encouragement

influencing offered

the

promotion

students

Figure 1.1 Research Model and Hypothesis

and

regarding

participation in EL activities (Bibi Alajmi, 2008; Kamarul,

VII Open University Malaysia (OUM)

2012). This research is also significant as it utilizes both deductive and inductive tactics. On the one hand, it produces a theoretical structure and arranges the constructs under the categories within that framework while on the other hand, through an inductive approach,

OUM was named as Open Distance Learning (ODL) in 2000. It is the seventh private university in Malaysia and it is owned by Malaysia’s eleven public university associations. Based on the philosophy that learning is

208

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 IX Instrument Development

supposed to be democratized, OUM has concentrated on generating a reasonable and easy corridor to Higher Education system with significant position on flexible entrance necessities like a student-friendly education system, and a blended learning method with mixtures of dissimilar forms of education. This system was planned to perform different features based on the studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s requirements,

information

and

communication

technologies and internet tools.

Researcher gathered the data in two steps. Firstly, the online

questionnaire

survey

instrument

distributed. After the online questionnaire, the interview questions followed to improve the survey, and to evaluate more appropriate outcomes and to develop the survey's

validity

and

reliability.

addition,

the

investigator applied online questionnaire as pre-test to evaluate the 25 questions and to enhance its value. In this research, a pre-test investigation was applied with

VIII Research Method

emphasizing on the validity of citing knowledge sharing Research methodology has many classifications, such

in the EL.

as, research methodology in terms of qualitative and quantitative

methods

(Williams,

2007).

These

approaches can be used as single and mixture method by investigators linked in OUM. For this study, mixed method is performed. Researcher has used both qualitative and quantitative approaches and he also examines and establishes the data gathered from selected cases (Creswell, 2012). Studies show that Quantitative and qualitative approaches are appropriate to grow the fortes and the reducing of weaknesses of the research methods (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Thus, in this method we can say that the findings and

outcomes

are

valid.

Furthermore,

Quantitative study shows the actuality of the cause and effectiveness of relationships among variables. On the other hand, qualitative study approaches to discover the implications and outlines, consider to particularly the activities and records carefully. There are many

X. Interview This research has shown the semi-structure interview questions that are comprised with; the research was created in 6 knowledgeable interviews selected online and off line by the facilitators and teachers in different faculties of OUM. The data have been gathered during two semesters in 2012-2013 academic years. In semistructured interviews where some facilitators, technical administrators, and some online teachers were in charge of distance learning system or EL. As revealed, the questions on the interview were open-ended; and each interview was about 10 to 15 minutes created on their arrangement, while some of the interviews were voice-recoded. The knowledge sharing intention factors and the effects of the knowledge sharing on the success of the EL were discussed in the case study area. Table 1.1 shows the interview questions.

researches in the Knowledge management area in which utilized the qualitative and quantitative methods XI. Questionnaire

as their key resources to collect data and to use the features of individual behavior constantly, which are frequently

veiled

(Nonaka

and

Takeuchi,

Instrument Plan

1995; Questionnaire survey based on the research

Chennamaneni, 2006; Jones, 2007; Bock et al., 2005; Ma, 2009; Stewart, 2008; Vashisth et al., 2010; Jewels and Ford, 2006).

conducted in DTPB is composed of two main sections. In the first part of the questionnaire, respondents were asked questions about personal characteristics, such as sex, age, educational level, duration of study, study courses. This section uses EL system as a moderating

209

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 variable in the study. The second section of the questionnaire is extracted from the DTPB model. Question components are measured as well as what the students ask and a Likert scale was used to rank it from very low to very high. The investigator as a viewer can approve examination methods of collecting data and assessments by viewing how the learners engaged in learning activities in EL system. The five-point Likert scale was applied to measure each paradigm which comprised 1= strongly disagree to 5= strongly agree. The Likert response allocated numeric values to help the analysis of the answers.

NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6

Table 1.1 The interview questions QUESTIONS Are the students learning in the EL system, frequently exchange and share knowledge and experiences with others? If not, what factors and situations preventing them? If you think yes, why? And what factors affect it? In your opinion, are the students in E-Learning system interested in participating and willing to share their knowledge and courses with other students? In your opinion, do they (students) share knowledge and develop learning experiences within EL system easily? Do they think that knowledge sharing is useful? In your opinion, what are the individual factors that effect on the studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s attitude toward knowledge sharing? Do they (students) think that they are comfortable and can trust and share better by EL system? Is EL system compatible with studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; values, current requirements and previous experiences?

Table 1.2 Statistics for Self-Efficacy (SE) Table 1.4 Descriptive Statistics for Intention to KS (IS)

Table 1.3 Descriptive Statistics for Perceived Behavioral Control

210

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 PB C1 PB C2 PB C3 PB C1 SE1

Table 1.5 the learning centers that collect questionnaire NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6

LEARNING CENTER (BRANCH) Bangi Learning centre Ipoh Learning centre Johor Learning centre Kelantan Learning centre OUM KL center OUM Petaling Jaya (PJ) Learning centre

STUDENTS 70 85 80 68 180 100

3.69

0.76

-0.644

1.157

4.02

0.69

-0.524

0.755

3.69

0.73

-0.601

1.251

3.69

0.76

-0.644

1.157

3.72

0.76

-0.625

1.322

SE2

3.53

0.82

-0.689

0.998

SE3

3.64

0.83

-0.643

0.843

SE1

3.72

0.76

-0.625

1.322

583 IS: Intention to knowledge sharing Behavior, PBC: XII Construct Measures

perceived behavior control, SE: self-efficacy,

The research theoretical model of this research is

XIV Descriptive statistic of variables

comprised of following paradigms, the independent variables which comprise two factors (self-efficacy, perceived

behavior

control

(OBC)).

Additionally,

dependent variable which intention to share knowledge, contributes in this study, There are also thirteen main constructions of the hypothetical model that are used in this study. Knowledge sharing intention plays a double role: dependent and independent paradigms. The 43 questionnaire items measured the relationship between variables; these statements were calculated according to a 5-point Likert scale which include 1=strongly disagree to 5= strongly agree.

Dimensions of each question are made then descriptive statistic include standard deviation and mean is gotten by compute device in SPSS software that itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s results are presents in table 1.7 the results of above table defines the people are studies have gotten advantages more than supposed mean, once these arenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t limitation for their learning as electronic and their condition is suitable in terms of the dimensions, special in subjects like attitude toward knowledge sharing (AI) with mean 4.02, succession in electronic teaching system (ES) with mean 3.94.

XIII Descriptive statistic of the questions and variables Table 1.7 Descriptive statistical of variables Descriptive statistic questioner includes quantity value, value, mean, standard deviation drawing was taken for

Variables

Mean

each question that its results is visible in table 1.6. Intention to knowledge

Table 1.6 Descriptive statistics of the questions Q?

Min

Max

Mean

IS1

3.94

Std. Devia tion 0.77

IS2

3.73

IS3

IS4

IS5

Skewn ess

sharing Behavior (IS) Kurtosis

0.778

0.819

0.88

0.882

0.121

4.14

0.68

0.681

0.722

3.61

0.85

0.853

0.48

3.44

0.83

0.837

0.646

IS6

3.71

0.82

0.822

0.525

IS7

3.46

0.86

0.868

0.436

Perceived Behavior Control (PBC) Self-Efficacy (SE)

211

Std. Deviation

3.56

0.70

3.80

0.56

3.63

0.70

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014

XV Qualitative Analysis Interviews were carried out on the system facilitators and teachers in OUM learning system. As mentioned earlier, the interview was done after the results from the survey research. In order to verify the research results from the survey method about the antecedents was used qualitative method as a supplementary technique with the answers from the case study that cooperate the self-efficacy effects on the knowledge sharing intention in the EL system. This part of the study will report the responses of the participants in the interview and how those responses give answers to research questions. XVI Participant Information According to the quantity of individual interviews that was dependent on participants from the OUM as case study. Since the research needs some explanations about details of study dimensions, the interview questions were requested that contribute by a few participants in OUM as case study. Choosing interviewees were beneficial and only integrated a small from the case study (Saunders et al., 2007). The interviewees who were conducting as individual interviews are recommended around 10 to 15 (Hill et al., 1997). Participants in this study consisted of 10 system facilitators and teachers engaging in the learning practice within the OUM e-learning system.

learners’ educational accomplishment (2000 Academic Press). Supporting this, the eleventh hypothesis is designed to examine the effect of Self-Efficacy on Perceived Behavioural Control. H1: Self-Efficacy has a positive effect on Perceived Behavioural Control in the EL system. Perceived Behavioural Control (PBC) is the third effective factor which determines students’ desire for KS in the EL system. It refers to people's perceptions of their ability to perform a given behaviour. It also points to the degree of individual control over transferral of information through the EL system. The higher the degree of control, the greater will be the desire for KS in the EL system. In order to examine the effect of Perceived Behavioural Control on KS among the users of the EL system, the next and fourth hypotheses of the research were designed. H2. Perceived Behavioural Control has a positive effect on the intention to share knowledge in the EL system.

Table 1.8

NO.

XVII Conclusions and recommendations To answer the questions related to hypotheses, four main questions were proposed and investigated. These research questions are:

Relationship

Perceived behavioral control and intention to share knowledge

Does self-efficacy effect on knowledge sharing intention in e-learning system? Self-Efficacy (SE), the first effective factor of PBC, refers to individuals’ belief that their own educational competences, to a greater extent than others’, have a critical function in motivating them to accomplish and control their behaviour. Investigators have proceeded to prove its information validity as well as its convergent validity in predicting general motivational findings, in terms of learners’ practice selections, effort, persistence, and emotional reactions. SE attitude has been found to be responsive to understated modifications in learners’ performance background, to become involved with selfregulated education procedures, and to mediate

212

Hypothesis Testing Results

Knowledge Self-Efficacy and perceived behavioral control

Hypotheses

Results

H2. The perceived behavioral control has a positive effect on the intention to share knowledge in EL system.

The findings of the research indicate that perceived behavioral control has a positive impact on intention to share knowledge.

H1. SelfEfficacy has a positive effect on perceived behavioral control in EL system.

The findings of the research supported that Self-Efficacy has a positive impact on perceived behavioral control.

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 student’s intent to share knowledge in EL system if these factors and variables will be applied. And because of this, the need to work on more studies and examining the related theories and models in the future can be much easier.

Figure 1.2

Results of Structural Modelling Analysis

REFERENCE

XVIII Restrictions of the study

[1]. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of

There were some limitations in the research method and

planned Behaviour. In J. Kuhi and J. Beckmann

data collecting. This often happens in similar studies

(Eds.):Action—control: From cognition to Behaviour (11-

done in behavioral field. There are also restrictions in

39). Heidelberg:Springer.

the examination of EL system in OUM as Open

[2]. Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human decision Processes,

University which educates through online system where students are not required to attend classes in the

50(1), 179-211. [3]. Artino, A. R. (2010). On-line or face-to-face learning?

traditional classroom as in face to face education.

Exploring the personal factors that predict students

Secondly, the investigation of some variables in this

‘choice of instructional format. The Internet and Higher

research like intention to share knowledge is sometimes

Education, 1(3), 185.

very difficult because the control on effective changes

[4]. Baker, R. K. and White, K. M. (2010). Predicting

on this structure is hard, for example, the application of

adolescents’ use of social networking sites from an

the whole factors of

extended theory of planned Behaviour perspective.

knowledge sharing Behavior in

Computers in Human Behaviour, 26, 1591-1597.

research model. Another research limitation is the lack of examination tools for all main factors on students’

[5]. Bock, G.-W., Zmud, R. W., Kim, Y. G. and Lee, J. N. (2005). Behavioural intention formation in KS: Examining

knowledge sharing behavior in EL system. The third

the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological

limitation was to adjust factors in relation to the intention

forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1),

to share knowledge in online environment that students

87-111.

can use many tools and technologies based on their

[6]. Bransford, J. D., A. L. Brown, and Cocking, R.R., eds. (2000). How People Learn. Washington, D.C., National

skills and abilities.

Academy Press. XIX Recommendations for Further Study

[7]. Carr,

N.,

and

Chambers,

(2006).

Teacher

professional learning in an online community: The experiences of the National Quality Schooling Framework

In the other aspect of this research it is also recommended

that

the

relation

among

structures must be investigated for successful results as what

this

current

study

did,

for

Pilot Project. Technology, Pedagogy and Education,

research

example,

15(2), 143 - 157. [8]. Chen, I. Y. L., Chen, N.-S., and Kinshuk, (2009).

the

Examining

the

factors

influencing

participants'

investigation of the main factors on intention to share,

behaviour in virtual learning communities. Educational

where it introduced two levels of intent to share. There

Technology & Society, 12(1), 134-148.

are three more effective structures in each level. Thus,

[9]. Chennamaneni, A. (2006). Determinants of KS Behaviours:

the effective examination of the factor of the variable

Developing and Testing an Integrated Theoretical Model.

such as Self-Efficacy on this study will approve the

The University Of Texas, Arlington.

213

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 [10]. Chiu, C.M., Hsu, M.H. and Wang, E.T.G. (2006).

[21]. Lin, H. F. and Lee, G. G. (2006). Effects of Socio-

Understanding KS in virtual communities: An integration of

Technical

social capital and social cognitive theories. Decision

Encourage KS. Management Decision, 44(1), 74-88.

Support Systems 42, 1872–1888.

Factors

Organizational

Intention

[22]. Lin, M.J., Hung S.W., Chen, C.J. (2009). Fostering the

[11]. Creswell, J. (2012). Educational research: Planning,

determinants of knowledge sharing in professional virtual

conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative

communities. Computers in Human Behavior,25(4), 929–

research (4thed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson

939.

Education.

[23]. Liu,

[12]. Ellis, A., Hollenbeck, J., Ilgen, D., Porter, C., West, B., and

M.-C.,

and

Wang,

J.-Y.

(2010).

Investigating

,knowledge integration in web-based thematic learning

Moon, H. (2003). Team learning: Collectively connecting

using

concept

mapping

assessment.

the dots. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 821–835.

Technology & Society, 13 (2), 25-39.

Educational

[13]. Fadzil, M., Latifah, L.A. (2010). Enhancing Teaching and

[24]. Liu, S. (2008). Student Interaction Experiences in

Learning: Development of a New E-learning Model at

Distance Learning Courses A Phenomenological Study.

Open

On-line Journal of Distance Learning Administration,

University

Malaysia.

Formal

Education:

Technologies for Scaling up ODL Programmes. OUM publication.

X1(1). [25]. Ma, W., W., (2009). Understanding on-line KS: An

[14]. Fadzil, M., Latifah, L.A. (2012). Factors Influencing The

interpersonal

Development Of Lifelong Learning Skills: Oum Tracer Study. The 40th Anniversary of KNOU Future of ODL for

perspective.

Computers

Education, 1–10. [26]. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge

‘Knowledge Network Society’ Korea National Open University.

relationship

Creating Company, New York: Oxford University Press. [27]. Prawat, R. S. (1996). Constructivism, modern and

[15]. Hiltz, S. R. and Turoff, M., (2005). Education goes digital:

postmodern.

the evolution of on-line learning and the revolution in

Educational

Psychologist,

31(3/4),

215.Publications.

higher education. Communications of the ACM, 48(10): 59-64.

[28]. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2007).

[16]. Honebein, P. C. (1996). Seven goals for the design of

Research Methods for Business sharing in professional

constructivist learning environments. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.),

virtual communities. Computers in Human Behavior,

Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in

Students (4th Ed.). Harlow, England: Pearson Education.

instructional design (11-24). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Educational Technology Publications.

[29]. Stewart, G. (2008).Factors Affecting Contribution to

instructional

Knowledge Repositories in Environments without an

design. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Educational Technology

Explicit Supportive Reward System. The University of the

[17]. Jewels, T. and Ford, M. (2006). Factors Influencing KS in Information Technology Projects. e-Service Journal, 5(1),

West Indies, Trinidad and Tobago. [30]. Tavousi M., Hidarnia A.R., Montazeri A. and Taremain F.

99-117.

(2009). Are Perceived Behavioural Control and SE

[18]. Johnson, R. B. and Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed

Distinct Constructs? European Journal of Scientific

Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. Educational researcher, 33(7), 14-27.

Research, 31(1), 44-52. [31]. Wasko, M.M. and Faraj, S. (2000). It is what one does:

[19]. Kanuka, H., and Rourke, L. (2008). Exploring the NonNeutrality

e-learning

Technologies.

Why people participate and help others in electronic

Technology,

communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information

Pedagogy and Education, 17(1), 5-16.

Systems, 9, 2-3, 155-173.

[20]. Lin, H. -F. (2007). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation

[32]. Wilson,

(1996).

Constructivist

learning

capability: An empirical study. International Journal of

environments: Case studies in instructional design.

Manpower, 28(3/4), 315−332.

Englewood

Cliffs,

N.J.:

Educational

Technology

Publications.

214

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014 [33]. Xie, K. U. I., Debacker, T. K., and Ferguson, C. (2006). Extending the traditional classroom through on-line discussion: The role of student motivation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(1), 67-89. [34]. Zhang, J. and Faerman, S. R. (2007). Distributed leadership in the development of a KS system, European Journal of Information Systems, 16, 479-493. [35]. Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Lamon, M., Messina, R., and Reeve, R. (2007). Socio-cognitive dynamics of knowledge building in the work of 9- and 10-years-olds. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(2), 117-145.

215

www.ijitce.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND CREATIVE ENGINEERING (ISSN:2045-8711) VOL.4 NO.5 M AY 2014

216