Designing a System for English Evaluation and Teaching Devices: A PZB and TAM Model Analysis
More details
Hide details
National Penghu University of Science and Technology, Makung, TAIWAN
Online publish date: 2018-03-10
Publish date: 2018-03-10
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(6):2107–2119
This paper discusses an English evaluation and teaching system consisting of several parts. The first part is a database comprising numerous subdatabases, which store login data and various levels of test questions of different levels. The second part is an arithmetic processing unit with a login module that produces a login interface to receive users’ accounts and passwords. The login module is electronically connected to the database system so that the module can verify the input accounts and passwords with the login data stored in the database. The unit also randomly selects questions from different levels to form evaluation sets and generates an evaluation interface. In addition, the device features an input unit for inputting instructions and a display unit to display interfaces during use. Knowledge innovation and management accelerates with the prevalence of online assessment and learning because it has no difficulties in breaking through the limits of both space and time. Previous studies developing English evaluation and teaching device systems have rarely been researched from the dual perspective of developing the information technology system and learning and teaching language. Utilising the technology acceptance model as our fundamental theory to design the use of learning system is a must for the English e-learners.
Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1997). The role of innovation characteristics and perceived voluntariness in the acceptance of information technologies. Decision sciences, 28, 557-582.
Chen, J.-L. (2011). The effects of education compatibility and technological expectancy on e-learning acceptance. Computers & Education, 57, 1501-1511.
Chiu, C.-M., & Wang, E. T. (2008). Understanding Web-based learning continuance intention: The role of subjective task value. Information & Management, 45, 194-201.
Davis, F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results (Doctoral Thesis). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Management science, 35, 982-1003.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Massachusetts, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Greenberg, L. (2013). LMS and LCMS: What’s the Difference? Retrieved from
Huang, S.-Y. (2005). Taiwanese students talk about English in Taiwan and their lives. Languages, Communities, and Education, 45.
Joiner, E. G. (1981). The Older Foreign Language Learner: A Challenge for Colleges and Universities. Language in Education: Theory and Practice, 34, ERIC.
Kang, G. D., & James, J. (2004). Service quality dimensions: an examination of Grönroos’s service quality model. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 14(4), 266-277.
King, W. R., & He, J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & management, 43(6), 740-755.
Krashen, S. D., Long, M. A., & Scarcella, R. C. (1979). Age, rate and eventual attainment in second language acquisition. TESOL quarterly, 573-582.
Lakhal, S., Khechine, H., & Pascot, D. (2013). Student behavioural intentions to use desktop video conferencing in a distance course: integration of autonomy to the UTAUT model. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 25, 93-121.
Lee, Y. C. (2006). An empirical investigation into factors influencing the adoption of an e-learning system. Online Information Review, 30(5), 517-541.
Liao, H.-L., & Lu, H.-P. (2008). The role of experience and innovation characteristics in the adoption and continued use of e-learning websites. Computers & Education, 51, 1405-1416.
Liaw, S.-S., Huang, H.-M., & Chen, G.-D. (2007). Surveying instructor and learner attitudes toward e-learning. Computers & Education, 49, 1066-1080.
Liu, J. (2013). E-learning in English classroom: Investigating factors impacting on ESL (English as Second Language) college students’ acceptance and use of the Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment (Moodle) (Masters Thesis). Iowa State University, Iowa.
Niranjan, T. T., & Metri, B. A. (2008). Client-vendor-end user triad: a service quality model for IS/ITES outsourcing. Journal of Services Research, 8(1), 123.
Padilla-Meléndez, A., Garrido-Moreno, A., & Del Aguila-Obra, A. R. (2008). Factors affecting e-collaboration technology use among management students. Computers & Education, 51, 609-623.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research. Journal of Marketing, 49, 41-50.
Polančič, G., Heričko, M., & Rozman, I. (2010). An empirical examination of application frameworks success based on technology acceptance model. Journal of Systems and Software, 83, 574-584.
Product Design. (n.d.). Retrieved from MBALib wiki:
Simcic Brønn, P. (2012). Adapting the PZB service quality model to reputation risk analysis and the implications for CSR communication. Journal of Communication Management, 16(1), 77-94.
Standardized test. (n.d.). In The Glossary of Education Reform. Retrieved from
Tan, P. J. B. (2013a). Applying the UTAUT to understand factors affecting the use of English e-learning websites in Taiwan. Sage Open, 3, 1-12.
Tan, P. J. B. (2013b). Students’ adoptions and attitudes towards electronic placement tests: A UTAUT analysis. American Journal of Computer Technology and Application, 1, 14-23.
Tan, P. J. B. (2015). English e-learning in the virtual classroom and the factors that influence ESL (English as a Second Language): Taiwanese citizens’ acceptance and use of the Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment. Social Science Information, 211-228.
Tan, P. J. B., & Hsu, M.-H. (2017a). Understanding the needs and criteria of employees in the electronics industry for English e-learning website programmes. 2017 International Conference on Industrial Informatics & Computational Intelligence, Cambodia.
Tan, P. J. B., & Hsu, M.-H. (2017b). Developing a system for English evaluation and teaching devices. 2017 International Conference on Applied System Innovation (ICASI), Sapporo, 938-941.
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. MIS quarterly, 561-570.
Teo, T., Wong, S. L., Thammetar, T., & Chattiwat, W. (2011). Assessing e-learning acceptance by university students in Thailand. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(8), 1356-1368.
Toral, S., Barrero, F., & Martínez-Torres, M. d. R. (2007). Analysis of utility and use of a web-based tool for digital signal processing teaching by means of a technological acceptance model. Computers & Education, 49, 957-975.
Urdan, T. A. (2000). Corporate e-Learning: Exploring a new frontier. San Francisco, CA: W.R. Hambrecht.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management science, 46(2), 186-204.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
William, K. K., & Michael, J. S. (2002). Psychophysical assessments of image-sensor fused imagery. Publish Information, 44(2), 257.
Wixom, B. H., & Todd, P. A. (2005). A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance. Information systems research, 16(1), 85-102.
Yoo, S. J., Han, S.-h., & Huang, W. (2012). The roles of intrinsic motivators and extrinsic motivators in promoting e-learning in the workplace: A case from South Korea. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 942-950.
Zhang, D., Zhao, J. L., Zhou, L. & Nunamaker, J. F. (2004). Can e-learning replace classroom learning? Communications of the ACM, 47(5), 75-79.