Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences

Published by: Kowsar

Role of Organizational Culture in Acceptance of Technology Among Teachers of Smart Schools Based on the Technology Acceptance Model: A Case Study of High Schools of Karaj City

Sayed Abdollah Ghasemtabar ORCID 1 , * , Mehdi Arabzadeh 2 and Gholam Hosein Rahimidoost 3
Authors Information
1 Department of Educational Technology, Tehran, Kharazmi University, Iran
2 Department of Psychology, Tehran, Kharazmi University, Iran
3 Department of Education, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
Article information
  • Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences: June 30, 2019, 10 (2); e90492
  • Published Online: July 23, 2019
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • Received: February 10, 2019
  • Revised: May 25, 2019
  • Accepted: May 28, 2019
  • DOI: 10.5812/ijvlms.90492

How to Cite: Ghasemtabar S A, Arabzadeh M, Rahimidoost G H . Role of Organizational Culture in Acceptance of Technology Among Teachers of Smart Schools Based on the Technology Acceptance Model: A Case Study of High Schools of Karaj City, Interdiscip J Virtual Learn Med Sci. 2019 ; 10(2):e90492. doi: 10.5812/ijvlms.90492.

Copyright © 2019, Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ( which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
  • 1. Teo T. Students and teachers' intention to use technology: Assessing their measurement equivalence and structural invariance. J Educ Comp Res. 2018;57(1):201-25. doi: 10.1177/0735633117749430.
  • 2. Wong B, Chai CS, Deng F, Qian Y. South china education majors’ epistemological beliefs and their conceptions of the nature of science. Asia-Pac Educ Res. 2010;19(1). doi: 10.3860/taper.v19i1.1512.
  • 3. Ministry of Education. Smart school instruction form. Frkreno; 2010. Available from:
  • 4. Luan WS, Teo T. Investigating the technology acceptance among student teachers in Malaysia: An application of the technology acceptance model (TAM). Asia-Pac Educ Res. 2009;18(2). doi: 10.3860/taper.v18i2.1327.
  • 5. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intension and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. 1st ed. Boston: Addison-Wesley Address; 1975.
  • 6. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991;50(2):179-211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t.
  • 7. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci. 1989;35(8):982-1003. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982.
  • 8. Teo T. Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Comput Educ. 2009;52(2):302-12. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006.
  • 9. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989;13(3):319. doi: 10.2307/249008.
  • 10. Venkatesh V, Morris M, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003;27(3):425. doi: 10.2307/30036540.
  • 11. Tsai YR. Applying the technology acceptance model (TAM) to explore the effects of a course management system (CMS)-assisted efl writing instruction. CALICO J. 2014;32(1):153-71. doi: 10.1558/calico.v32i1.25961.
  • 12. Ghanbari S, Karimi I. [The effect of information technology and communication training for effective adoption of IT based technology acceptance model (TAM)]. Public Adm Perspect. Persian.
  • 13. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci. 2000;46(2):186-204. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.
  • 14. Venkatesh V, Morris MG. Why don't men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Q. 2000;24(1):115. doi: 10.2307/3250981.
  • 15. Akinbobola OI, Adeleke AA. External variables as antecedents of users perception in virtual library usage. Interdiscip J Inf Knowl Manage. 2016;11:73-87. doi: 10.28945/3450.
  • 16. Denison DR. Organizational culture: Can it be a key lever for driving organizational change? In: Cooper CL CSEP, editor. The international handbook of organizational culture and climate. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2000. p. 347-76.
  • 17. Denison D, Lief C, Ward JL. Culture in family-owned enterprises: Recognizing and leveraging unique strengths. Fam Bus Rev. 2016;17(1):61-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-6248.2004.00004.x.
  • 18. Zhu C. Organisational culture and technology-enhanced innovation in higher education. Technol Pedagogy Educ. 2013;24(1):65-79. doi: 10.1080/1475939x.2013.822414.
  • 19. Silic M, Back A. Organizational culture impact on acceptance and use of unified communications and collaboration technology in organizations. Measur Bus Excel. 2013;20(1):21-40.
  • 20. Tabibi S, Farhangi AA, Nasiripour AA, Baradaran Kazemzadeh R, Ebrahimi P. [Assessment the related factors to hospital information system acceptance]. JHPM. 2014;3(1):14-26. Persian.
  • 21. Kothaneth S. The relationship between organizational culture, usability, and instructional technology acceptance [dissertation]. The Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; 2012.
  • 22. Ardalan MR, Salimi Q, Rajaeepour S, Molavy H. [A study of relationship between person-organization fit and organizational culture in western iran state universities (Hamedan, Kermanshah and Kordestan)]. IRPHE. 2008;14(1):97-131. Persian.
  • 23. Goodarzvand Chegini M, Ismaili S. [The study of organizational culture associated with the adoption of an integrated model for the adoption and use of information technology in hospitals in Rasht]. Payavard Salamat. 2015;9(1):29-42. Persian.
  • 24. Abbasi Asl M, Zahed Babelan A, Namvar Y. [The study of related factors to guidance school teachers using amount from ICT in Teaching and Learning process]. Education. 2011;13(4):95-106. Persian.
  • 25. Srite M. Culture as an explanation of technology acceptance differences: An empirical investigation of chinese and us users. Australasian J Inf Sys. 2006;14(1). doi: 10.3127/ajis.v14i1.4.
  • 26. Kothaneth S. A pilot study on the cross-cultural acceptance of technology. Proc Hum Fac Ergonomics Soc An Meet. 2010;54(23):1951-5. doi: 10.1177/154193121005402310.
  • 27. Teo T, Huang F, Hoi CKW. Explicating the influences that explain intention to use technology among English teachers in China. Interact Learn Environ. 2017;26(4):460-75. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2017.1341940.
  • 28. Teo T, Faruk Ursavaş O, Bahçekapili E. Efficiency of the technology acceptance model to explain pre‐service teachers' intention to use technology. Campus-Wide Inf Sys. 2011;28(2):93-101. doi: 10.1108/10650741111117798.
  • 29. Gardner C, Amoroso DL. Development of an instrument to measure the acceptance of Internet technology by consumers. 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Big Island, USA. IEEE; 2004. p. 1-10.
  • 30. Rahimnia F, Alizadeh M. [The study of organizational culture dimensions based on the denison model for faculties of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad]. Educ Psychol Stud. 2009;35(24):147-70. Persian.
  • 31. Mortazavi M, Shabani A, Rajaei Pour S, Azarbakhsh AM. [Study of organizational culture of the national library of the islamic republic based on the denison model]. NASTINFO. 2014;25(4):24-40. Persian.
  • 32. Creemers BPM. From school effectiveness and school improvement to effective school improvement: Background, theoretical analysis, and outline of the empirical study. Educ Res Eval. 2010;8(4):343-62. doi: 10.1076/edre.8.4.343.8814.
  • 33. Flores MA. The impact of school culture and leadership on new teachers' learning in the workplace. Int J Leadership Educ. 2004;7(4):297-318. doi: 10.1080/1360312042000226918.
  • 34. Teo T. Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: Model development and test. Comput Educ. 2011;57(4):2432-40. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.008.
  • 35. Chien SP, Wu HK, Hsu YS. An investigation of teachers’ beliefs and their use of technology-based assessments. Comput Hum Behav. 2014;31:198-210. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.037.
  • 36. Oye ND, A.Iahad N, Ab.Rahim N. The history of UTAUT model and its impact on ICT acceptance and usage by academicians. Educ Inf Technol. 2012;19(1):251-70. doi: 10.1007/s10639-012-9189-9.
  • 37. Niederhauser DS, Perkmen S. Beyond self-efficacy: Measuring pre-service teachers’ instructional technology outcome expectations. Comput Hum Behav. 2010;26(3):436-42. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.12.002.
  • 38. Ifenthaler D, Schweinbenz V. The acceptance of Tablet-PCs in classroom instruction: The teachers’ perspectives. Comput Hum Behav. 2013;29(3):525-34. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.11.004.
  • 39. Pynoo B, Devolder P, Tondeur J, van Braak J, Duyck W, Duyck P. Predicting secondary school teachers’ acceptance and use of a digital learning environment: A cross-sectional study. Comput Hum Behav. 2011;27(1):568-75. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.10.005.
  • 40. Zakeri AH, Haji Khajehlu S, Afraei H, Zangui S. [Study of teachers' attitude towards the application of educational technologies in the teaching process]. Educ Psychol Stud. 2011;6(6):27-46. Persian.
  • 41. Wong KT, Teo T, Russo S. Influence of gender and computer teaching efficacy on computer acceptance among Malaysian student teachers: An extended technology acceptance model. Australasian J Educ Technol. 2012;28(7). doi: 10.14742/ajet.796.
  • 42. Baydas O, Goktas Y. Influential factors on preservice teachers' intentions to use ICT in future lessons. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;56:170-8. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.030.

Featured Image:

Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:



Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments