Information and communication technologies: Use and factors for success amongst academics in private and public universities in Nigeria

Abstract

Background: The higher education sector is making a conscious effort to integrate information and communication technologies (ICTs) into the academe with a view to improving teaching, learning and access to knowledge. Unfortunately, the use of ICTs in teaching by academics in Nigerian universities is far below expectation.Objectives: The aim of this article was to report on a study that examined the underlying factors determining the use of ICTs in teaching by academics in private and public universities in Nigeria by using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) as a theoretical lens.Method: A mixed method approach involving the use of questionnaires and semi-structured interviews was adopted for the study. Data were collected from 267 academics in 3 faculties and 10 key informants who were in managerial positions at the University of Ibadan and Covenant University.Results: Regression analyses indicated that only facilitating conditions (FCs) (β = −0.345, t = −3.221, p = 0.002) have significant influence on the use of ICT in teaching at the University of Ibadan. However, both effort expectancy (EE) (β = 0.380, t = 3.116, p = 0.003) and FCs (β = −0.281, t = −2.327, p = 0.023) have significant influence on the use of ICT by academics in Covenant University. The qualitative study explicates these factors: institutional policy, technological infrastructure, simplicity of use, fund and organisational support as success factors for ICT use in teaching. Further findings revealed that age had an effect on EE and FCs amongst academics at the University of Ibadan, but out of all the demographic factors, age emerged as the only variable that had an effect on social influence amongst academics in Covenant University.Conclusion: The study concludes that stakeholders in higher institutions should give adequate attention to these underlying factors: FCs and EE for optimal success of ICT use in teaching. The findings of this study have far-reaching implications for policy makers within the educational environs and intervention strategies on the part of the university stakeholders in supporting ICT use in teaching.

A strategic approach of the crucial elements for the implementation of digital tools and processes in higher education

“…It is mentioned as one “essential component” in Abusalim et al (2020, p. 2), as a “necessary condition”, a “determinant” for it (Seifu, 2020, p. 4). The lack of an adequate or inadequate technological provision is also remarked as an obstacle (Alabi & Mutula, 2020; Birch & Burnett, 2009; Kumar & Daniel, 2016; Naveed et al, 2017; Taylor et al, 2018) and is pointed as a factor that makes instructors feel that their online or blended approaches to HE are worse than their face‐to‐face ones (Taylor et al, 2018). One of the studies highlight the importance of the high cost of this technological staff as a problem for institutions (Alabi & Mutula, 2020), and two emphasize the relevance of providing technology adequate to the conditions of the context, not the best either the most advanced, the most adequate (Seifu, 2020), observing that “institutions with limited resources should start small” (Birch & Burnett, 2009, p. 6).…”

“…In this regard, the literature of six papers must emphasize the relevance of not training only using workshops, but implementing different training models, such as mentoring programmes, peer‐to‐peer programmes, one‐to‐one assistance, good practice documentation and identification of faculty champions, among others (Birch & Burnett, 2009; Cochrane et al, 2017; Coles et al, 2020; Correa & Paredes, 2009; Fong et al, 2014; Taylor et al, 2018). Additionally, training is underlying as a success factor not just for increasing skills, but for becoming familiar with ideas and promoting the confidence and willingness of participants to implement the programmes (Fong et al, 2014; Kumar & Daniel, 2016; Marcelo & Yot‐Dominguez, 2019), and also for increasing the perception of easiness, usefulness and relevance of the implementation itself, which are essential factors for guaranteeing the implementation (Alabi & Mutula, 2020; Arancibia et al, 2019; Fong et al, 2014; Marcelo & Yot‐Dominguez, 2019; Seifu, 2020; Taylor et al, 2018).…”

“…Twenty‐three papers in total were analysed, with a range of publication between 2009 and 2020. From them, just two papers were exclusively theoretical approaches (Anthony et al, 2020; Cochrane et al, 2017), and the others included experiences from a wide open plethora of international institutions from Argentina (Grasso et al, 2019), Australia (Birch & Burnett, 2009), Canada (Taylor et al, 2018), Chile (Arancibia et al, 2019), Croatia (Zuvic‐Butorac & Nebic, 2009), China (Fong et al, 2014), Denmark (Haase & Buus, 2020), Ethiopiala (Seifu, 2020), Fiji (Kumar & Daniel, 2016), Jordan (Abusalim et al, 2020), Kazjastan (Vyortkina, 2014), Nigeria (Alabi & Mutula, 2020), Portugal (Correia & Martins, 2011; Sanches, 2016), Saudi Arabia (Naveed et al, 2017), Spain (Correa & Paredes, 2009; Marcelo & Yot‐Dominguez, 2019), Turkey (Altun et al, 2011) and USA (Coles et al, 2020); or from collections of countries as in the paper leaded by Altinay et al (2019), where they analysed data from institutions from Turkey, Spain, Sweden, India, Egypt and Canada, or the paper signed by Murphy and Farley (2017) that includes data from China, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Indonesia, Laos PDR, Cambodia, Singapore, Vietnam, Pakistan, Russia, Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Samoa and Fiji, which gives the study a clear global perspective.…”

“…fidence and willingness of participants to implement the programmes(Fong et al, 2014;Kumar & Daniel, 2016;Marcelo & Yot-Dominguez, 2019), and also for increasing the perception of easiness, usefulness and relevance of the implementation itself, which are essential factors for guaranteeing the implementation(Alabi & Mutula, 2020; Arancibia et al, 2019;Fong et al, 2014;Marcelo & Yot-Dominguez, 2019;Seifu, 2020;Taylor et al, 2018).…”

Are university teachers ready to use and adopt e-learning system? An empirical substantiation during COVID-19 pandemic

“…The stakeholders of universities need to be involved in helping academics to promote a greater sense of ICT use in teaching through the provision of a supportive environment, adequate infrastructure, hardware, software, technical support and regular training (Alabi and Mutula, 2020). However, it was found that in private and public universities the level of technology adoption and integration in teaching has not progressed.…”