1.

Findings and Analysis

1.1. Demographic Profile of the Respondents
The chart 1 and 2 in Appendix shows the demographic profile of the respondents. Chart
1 includes all the respondents surveyed, while chart 2 includes all the respondents who
have used or interacted with a MOOC platform at least once. Which gives us a valuable
insight that MOOC platforms are not very popular amongst the school goers as the
percentage drops from 10% to 1% when we exclude the respondents who are not
acquainted with MOOC platforms. The platforms are mostly used by the
undergraduates for crucial skill development and those who are working to improve their
functionality in their respective field of works. The chart 3 shows that these MOOC
platforms became significantly more popular in our country during the start of lockdown
period due to COVID-19.
1.2. Tests of Hypothesis
Original Sample Standard T P Hyp Result
Sample Mean Deviation Statistics Val othe
(O) (M) (STDEV) (| ues
sis
O/STDEV|)
Adoption Behavior -> 0.316 0.325 0.126 2.495 0.01 H8a Suppo
Brand Attitude 3 rted
Continuation Behavior 0.387 0.385 0.120 3.235 0.00 H8b Suppo
-> Brand Attitude 1 rted
Customer Satisfaction 0.263 0.258 0.109 2.413 0.01 H7 Suppo
-> Continuation 6 rted
Behavior
Ease of use -> 0.323 0.327 0.125 2.587 0.01 H5 Suppo
Continuation Behavior 0 rted
Engagement -> 0.207 0.218 0.152 1.356 0.17 H4 Not
Continuation Behavior 6 Suppo
rted
Instructional Quality -0.087 -0.090 0.110 0.790 0.43 H6 Not
-> Continuation 0 Suppo
Behavior
rted
Social Influence -> -0.004 0.033 0.122 0.036 0.97 H3 Not
Adoption Behavior 1 Suppo
rted
Student Intention -> 0.369 0.378 0.110 3.363 0.00 H2 Suppo
Adoption Behavior 1 rted
Value Perception -> 0.177 0.193 0.125 1.417 0.15 H1 Not
Adoption Behavior 7 Suppo
rted

The hypothesized relationship between the constructs were tested using the SmartPLS
software [ CITATION Rin15 \l 1033 ]. The table above shows that student intention has a
positive effect on MOOC platform adoption behavior. The estimated paths are
statistically significant at 95% confidence interval (p = 0.001 < 0.05). Furthermore, ease
of use and customer satisfaction have direct impact on the brand continuation, the
results are statistically significant at 0.01 level. We can also conclude that social
influence plays a little to no role in the adoption of MOOC platforms. The findings
support our hypothesis H2, H5, H7, H8-a, and H8-b.
1.3. Analysis of Findings
Demographic profile of respondents shows that the study is made of sample from each
significant education level in our country taking survey participants from each level
using stratified sampling method. Thus, the sample diversity was maintained in line with
our intention of the study.
Test of Hypothesis results from direct effects of drivers and inhibitors of Adoption
Confirmation and Continuance Intentions indicated that student intentions, ease of use
and customer satisfaction lead to user’s satisfaction on forming a positive Brand
attitude.
  Original Sample (O) Sample Mean Bias 5.0% 95.0
(M) %
Adoption Behavior -> Brand Attitude 0.316 0.325 0.010 0.093 0.504
Continuation Behavior -> Brand Attitude 0.387 0.385 - 0.191 0.579
0.002
Customer Satisfaction -> Continuation 0.263 0.258 - 0.094 0.450
Behavior 0.005
Ease of use -> Continuation Behavior 0.323 0.327 0.004 0.114 0.521
Engagement -> Continuation Behavior 0.207 0.218 0.011 - 0.452
0.035
Instructional Quality -> Continuation -0.087 -0.090 - - 0.121
Behavior 0.003 0.239
Social Influence -> Adoption Behavior -0.004 0.033 0.037 - 0.158
0.258
Student Intention -> Adoption Behavior 0.369 0.378 0.009 0.165 0.519
Value Perception -> Adoption Behavior 0.177 0.193 0.016 - 0.363
0.044

From the table above, we can see that the bias is not significant enough to use
moderated results.
The findings also tell us that value perception does not have a significant effect on the
MOOC platform adoption behaviors. Social influence and instruction quality of the
platforms also don’t have a significant effect on the continuance or adoption of these
platforms.
APPENDIX
Chart 1

Chart 2
Chart 3

Source: Google Trend Results

Bibliography
Ringle, C. M.-M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH, http://www.smartpls.com.