Understanding and Predicting Students’ Entrepreneurial Intention through Business Simulation Games: A Perspective of COVID-19
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Business Simulation Games and Their Benefits
1.2. Game Design
1.3. Purpose of the Study
2. Research Model and Theory and Hypotheses Building
2.1. Research Model and Theory
2.2. Learnability
2.3. Knowledge Sharing
2.4. Knowledge Application
2.5. Self-Efficacy
2.6. Perceived Pleasure
2.7. Perceived Usefulness
2.8. Perceived Ease of Use
2.9. Business Simulation and Learning Performance
2.10. Entrepreneurial Intention
3. Research Methodology and Data Collection
3.1. Measurements
3.1.1. Learnability
3.1.2. Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness
3.1.3. Knowledge Application and Knowledge Sharing
3.1.4. Self-Efficacy and Perceived Enjoyment
3.1.5. Technology Adoption and Learning Performance
3.1.6. Entrepreneurial Intention
4. Results and Data Analysis
Reliability and Validity
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions and Implications
Limitations and Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Appendix B. Questionnaire: Survey Items
- KS1.
- The knowledge shared by teachers and class-fellows over business simulation games is relevant to the topics.
- KS2.
- The knowledge shared by teachers and class-fellows over business simulation games is easy to understand.
- KS3.
- The knowledge shared by teachers and class-fellows over business simulation games is complete.
- KS4.
- The knowledge shared by teachers and class-fellows over clouds is reliable.
- KA1.
- Past experiences and knowledge of business simulation games help to tackle academic problems.
- KA2.
- Previous experiences and knowledge of business simulation games help in the decision-making process.
- KA3.
- Previous experiences and knowledge of business simulation games should be employed in problem-solving.
- LA1.
- A lot of training is needed to perform the work while using business simulation games.
- LA2.
- Specific skills are needed to perform the work while using business simulation games.
- LA3.
- Experience is needed to perform the work while using business simulation games.
- LA4.
- Business simulation games take a lot of time to learn how to perform the work.
- LA5.
- I always know what the results will be before using business simulation games.
- PSE1.
- I have the skills necessary to use the business simulation games.
- PSE2.
- I have an Internet connection fast enough to use the business simulation games.
- PSE3.
- I have the knowledge necessary to use business simulation games.
- PSE4.
- Overall, I am ready to use the business simulation games.
- PE1.
- I find using the business simulation games to be enjoyable for fulfilling my academics needs.
- PE2.
- The actual process of business simulation games is pleasant.
- PE3.
- I have fun playing business simulation games.
- PU1.
- Adopting business simulation games would improve my academic performance.
- PU2.
- Adopting business simulation games would increase the efficiency of my studies and work.
- PU3.
- Adopting business simulation games would make it easier to manage knowledge.
- PU4.
- Adopting business simulation games in academia would increase my performance.
- PU5.
- Adopting business simulation games would enable me to accomplish tasks more quickly.
- PEU1.
- Learning to adopt business simulation games would be easy for me.
- PEU2.
- My interaction with business simulation games would be clear and understandable.
- PEU3.
- It would be easy for me to become skillful by using business simulation games for learning.
- TA1.
- I predict that I will continue to use business simulation games for educational purposes.
- TA2.
- I plan to use business simulation games to manage my educational tasks.
- TA3.
- I intend to use business simulation games in the future for academic purposes.
- LP1.
- I plan to use business simulation games to manage my education-related learning.
- LP2.
- I predict that I will continue to use simulation games for educational purposes and feel competent in completing my academic tasks.
- LP3.
- I have learned how to do my task compilation efficiently.
- EI1.
- I am ready to do anything to be an entrepreneur.
- EI2.
- My professional goal is to become an entrepreneur.
- EI3.
- I am determined to create a business venture in the future.
References
- Adobor, H.; Daneshfar, A. Management simulations: Determining their effectiveness. J. Manag. Dev. 2006, 25, 151–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gabrielsson, J.; Tell, J.; Politis, D. Business simulation exercises in small business management education: Using principles and ideas from action learning. Action Learn. Res. Pract. 2010, 7, 3–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, T.; Khan, M.; Khan, F.; Hui, J. Are we ready for the new fatal Coronavirus: Scenario of Pakistan? Hum. Vaccines Immunother. 2020, 16, 736–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ajzen, I.; Fishbein, M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour; Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- Alalwan, N.; Al-Rahmi, W.M.; Alfarraj, O.; Alzahrani, A.; Yahaya, N.; Al-Rahmi, A.M. Integrated Three Theories to Develop a Model of Factors Affecting Students’ Academic Performance in Higher Education. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 98725–98742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alamri, M.M.; Almaiah, M.A.; Al-Rahmi, W.M. The Role of Compatibility and Task-Technology Fit (TTF): On Social Networking Applications (SNAs) Usage as Sustainability in Higher Education. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 161668–161681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alamri, M.M.; Almaiah, M.A.; Al-Rahmi, W.M. Social media applications affecting Students’ academic performance: A model developed for sustainability in higher education. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aldás-Manzano, J.; Lassala-Navarré, C.; Ruiz-Mafé, C.; Sanz-Blas, S. Key drivers of internet banking services use. Online Inf. Rev. 2009, 33, 67–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alenazy, W.M.; Al-Rahmi, W.M.; Khan, M.S. Validation of TAM model on social media use for collaborative learning to enhance collaborative authoring. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 71550–71562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexander, M.W.; Truell, A.D.; Zhao, J.J. Expected advantages and disadvantages of online learning: Perceptions from college students who have not taken online courses. Issues Inf. Syst. 2012, 13, 193–200. [Google Scholar]
- Alhussain, T.; Al-Rahmi, W.M.; Othman, M.S. Students’ Perceptions of Social Networks Platforms use in Higher Education: A Qualitative Research. Int. J. Adv. Trends Comput. Sci. Eng. 2020, 9, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brady, K.P.; Holcomb, L.B.; Smith, B.V. The Use of Alternative Social Networking Sites in Higher Educational Settings: A Case Study of the E-Learning Benefits of Ning in Education. J. Interact. Online Learn. 2010, 9, 151–170. [Google Scholar]
- Alrafi, A. The Technology Acceptance Model a Critical Analysis with Reference to the Managerial Use of Information and Communication Technology; ICT: Leeds, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Rahmi, W.M.; Alzahrani, A.I.; Yahaya, N.; Alalwan, N.; Kamin, Y.B. Digital communication: Information and communication technology (ICT) usage for education sustainability. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Rahmi, W.M.; Yahaya, N.; Aldraiweesh, A.A.; Alamri, M.M.; Aljarboa, N.A.; Alturki, U.; Aljeraiwi, A.A. Integrating technology acceptance model with innovation diffusion theory: An empirical investigation on students’ intention to use E-learning systems. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 26797–26809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- AbouRizk, S. Stochastic Simulation of Construction Bidding and Project Management. Microcomput. Civ. Eng. 1993, 8, 343–353. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Rahmi, W.M.; Zeki, A.M. A model of using social media for collaborative learning to enhance learners’ performance on learning. J. King Saud Univ. Comput. Inf. Sci. 2017, 29, 526–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Anderson, L.W. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives; Longman: New York, NY, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Arpaci, L. Antecedents and consequences of cloud computing adoption in education to achieve knowledge management. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 70, 382–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Auchter, E.; Kriz, W. The impact of business simulations as a teaching method on entrepreneurial competencies and motivation—A review of 10 years of evaluation research in entrepreneurship education. In The Shift from Teaching to Learning: Individual 2014, Collective and Organizational Learning through Gaming & Simulation; W. Bertelsmann: Bielefeld, Germany, 2014; pp. 187–197. [Google Scholar]
- Mawhirter, D.A.; Garofalo, P.F. Expect the Unexpected: Simulation Games as a Teaching Strategy. Clin. Simul. Nurs. 2016, 12, 132–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandura, A.; Reese, L.; Adams, N.E. Microanalysis of action and fear arousal as a function of differential levels of perceived self-efficacy. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1982, 5, 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barbour, M.; Adelstein, D.; Morrison, J. The forgotten teachers in K-12 online learning: Examining the perceptions of teachers who develop K-12 online courses. Int. J. Online Pedagog. Course Dev. 2014, 4, 18–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Beckers, K.; Pape, S. A serious game for eliciting social engineering security requirements. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 24th International Requirements Engineering Conference, RE 2016, Beijing, China, 12–16 September 2016; pp. 16–25. [Google Scholar]
- Vanevenhoven, J.; Liguori, E. The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education: Introducing the Entrepreneurship Education Project. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2013, 51, 315–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, M.J. Using login data to monitor student involvement in a business simulation game. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2015, 13, 154–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bell, R.; Loon, M. Reprint: The impact of critical thinking disposition on learning using business simulations. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2015, 13, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kriz, W.; Auchter, E. 2007-Evaluation of Simulation Games in the Exist-priMEcup Evaluation Study for the EXIST-Program of the German Ministry of Economy; Primecup gGmbH: Stuttgart, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Bentler, P. EQS: Structural Equations Program Manual, BMDP Statistical Software; University of California: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Bharati, V.; Srikanth, R. Modified UTAUT2 model for m-learning among students in India. Int. J. Learn. Chang. 2018, 10, 5–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dewey, J. Education and Experience; Macmillan: New York, NY, USA, 1938. [Google Scholar]
- Seaborn, K.; Felsb, D.I. Gamification in theory and action: A survey. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2015, 74, 14–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunicke, R.; LeBlanc, M.; Zubek, R. MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research. Adv. Artif. Intell. 2014, 12, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Deci, E.; Koestner, R.; Ryan, R. Extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivations in education: Reconsidered once again. Rev. Educ. Res. 2001, 71, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Solomon, G.; Fernald, L. Trends in Small Business Management and Entrepreneurship Education in the United States. Entrep. Theory Pract. 1991, 15, 25–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhattacherjee, A. Understanding information systems continuance: An expectation confirmation model. MIS Q. 2001, 25, 351–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, S.-Y. Green helpfulness or fun? Influences of green perceived value on the green loyalty of users and non-users of public bikes. Transp. Policy 2016, 47, 149–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sukkar, A.; Hasa, H. Toward a model for the acceptance of internet banking in developing countries. Inf. Technol. Dev. 2005, 11, 381–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blakely, G.; Skirton, H.; Cooper, S.; Allum, P.; Nelmes, P. Use of educational games in the health profession: A mixed-methods study of educators’ perspectives in the U.K. Nurs. Health Sci. 2010, 12, 27–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bourne, J.; Harris, D.; Mayadas, F. Online engineering education: Learning anywhere, anytime. J. Online Learn. 2005, 3, 146–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zulfiqar, S.; Sarwar, B.; Aziz, S.; Chandia, K.E.; Khan, M.K. An Analysis of Influence of Business Simulation Games on Business Schools Student’s Attitude and Intention towards Entrepreneurial Activities. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2019, 57, 106–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sanchez, R.; Hueros, A. Motivational factors that influence the acceptance of Moodle. Using TAM. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 1632–1640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chickering, W.; Gamson, Z.F. Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. AAHE Bull. 1987, 39, 3–7. [Google Scholar]
- Chin, W.; Marcolin, B.; Newsted, P. A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Emotion/adoption study. Inf. Syst. Res. 2003, 14, 189–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chiu, C.-M.; Hsiang Hsu, M.; Wang, E.T.G. Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories. Decis. Support Syst. 2006, 42, 1872–1888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, G.Y. Learning through digital storytelling: Exploring entertainment techniques in lecture video. Educ. Media Int. 2018, 55, 49–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christoph Winkler, E.S.S.Y. Improvement of Practice in Entrepreneurship Education through Action Research: The Case of Coworking at a Nonresidential College. Entrep. Educ. Pedagog. 2018, 1, 139–165. [Google Scholar]
- Darmanto, S.; Giyah, Y. Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Self Efficacy in Developing Entrepreneurial Behavior of Entrepreneur Students. Acad. Entrep. J. 2018, 24, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, F.D. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. Mis Q. 1989, 13, 319–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Deterding, S.; Dixon, D.; Khaled, R.; Nacke, L. From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining gamification. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, Tampere, Finland, 29–30 September 2011; pp. 9–15. [Google Scholar]
- Dhawan, S. Online Learning: A Panacea in the Time of COVID-19 Crisis. J. Educ. Technol. Syst. 2020, 46, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, V.; Thurman, A. How many ways can we define online learning? A systematic literature review of definitions of online learning (1988–2018). Am. J. Distance Educ. 2019, 33, 289–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamdoun, M.; Jabbour, C.C.; Othman, H.B. Knowledge transfer and organizational innovation: Impacts of quality and environmental management. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 193, 759–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shepherd, C.E.; Bolliger, D.U.; Dousay, T.A.; Persichitte, K. Preparing Teachers for Online Instruction with a Graduate Certif cate Program. TechTrends 2016, 60, 41–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ode, E.; Ayavoo, R. The mediating role of knowledge application in the relationship between knowledge management practices and firm innovation. J. Innov. Knowl. 2020, 5, 210–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheung, A.; Slavin, R. The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educ. Res. Rev. 2013, 9, 88–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kriz, W.C.; Auchter, E. 10 Years of Evaluation Research into Gaming Simulation for German Entrepreneurship and new Study on Its Long-Term effect. Simul. Gaming 2016, 47, 179–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dickinson, J.; Gentry, J.; Burns, A. A seminal inventory of basic research using business simulation games. Paper presented at the Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning: 2014. In Proceedings of the Annual ABSEL Conference 2004, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 24–26 March 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Caponetto, I.; Earp, J.; Ott, M. Gamification and Education: A Literature Review. ITD-CNR 2014, 9, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
- Caruana, A.; Rocca, A.L.; Snehota, I. Learner Satisfaction in Marketing Simulation Games: Antecedents and Influencers. J. Mark. Educ. 2016, 38, 107–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yukselturk, E.; Altiok, S. An investigation of the effects of programming with Scratch on the preservice IT teachers’ self-efficacy perceptions and attitudes towards computer programming. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2016, 48, 789–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chea, S.; Luo, M. Post-adoption behaviors of e-service customers: The interplay of cognition and emotion. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2008, 12, 29–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, B.; Bryer, T. Investigating instructional strategies for using social mediain formal and informal learning. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learn. 2012, 13, 87–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chester, S.; Stephen, J.H.; Tosti, H.C.; Addison, Y.S. Effects of Situated Mobile Learning Approach on Learning Motivation and Performance of EFL Students. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2016, 19, 263–276. [Google Scholar]
- Chia, R.; Holt, R. The nature of knowledge in business schools. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 2008, 7, 471–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doern, R.; Williams, N.; Vorley, T. Special issue on entrepreneurship and crises: Business as usual? An introduction and review of the literature. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 2020, 31, 400–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doyle, D.; Brown, F.W. Using a business simulation to teach applied skills—The benefits and the challenges of using student teams from multiple countries. J. Eur. Ind. Train. 2000, 24, 330–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dulcica, Z.; Pavlicb, D.; Silicc, I. Evaluating the intended use of Decision Support System (DSS) by applying Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in business organizations in Croatia. Croatia 2012, 58, 1565–1575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eagleton, S. An exploration of the factors that contribute to learning satisfaction of first-year anatomy and physiology students. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2015, 39, 158–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eckhaus, E.; Klein, G.; Kantor, J. Xperiential learning in management education. Business 2017. Manag. Educ. 2017, 15, 42–56. [Google Scholar]
- Elkaseh, A.M.; Wong, K.W.; Fung, C.C. Perceived Ease of Use and Perceived Usefulness of Social Media for e-Learning in Libyan Higher Education: A Structural Equation Modeling Analysis. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 2016, 6, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Evans, C.; Dion, K. Group cohesion and performance: A meta-analysis. Small Group Res. 2012, 43, 690–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fagan, M.; Kilmon, C.; Pandey, V. Exploring the adoption of a virtual reality simulation:The role of perceived ease of use, perceived. Campus-Wide Inf. Syst. 2012, 29, 117–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fatima, T.; Raja, U.; Malik, M.A.R.; Jahanzeb, S. Leader–member exchange quality and employees job outcomes: A parallel mediation model. Eurasia Bus. Econ. Soc. 2020, 10, 309–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Favale, T.; Soro, F.; Trevisan, M.; Drago, I.; Mellia, M. Campus traffic and e-Learning during COVID-19 pandemic. Comput. Netw. 2020, 176, 107290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernandes, N. Economic Effects of Coronavirus Outbreak (COVID-19) on the World Economy; IESE Business School: Barcelona, Spain, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Fox, J.; Pittaway, L.; Uzuegbunam, I. Simulations in entrepreneurship education: Serious games and learning through play. Entrep. Educ. Pedagog. 2018, 1, 61–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferreira, N.S.C.; Haddad, M.E.O.; Faria, A.A. Educational Technology and Educational Management in the Higher Education: New Ways of Forming Professionals. Open J. Soc. Sci. 2014, 2, 7–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fitó-bertran, A.; Hernández-lara, A.; Serradell, E. The effect of competences on learning results an educational experience with a business simulator. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 51, 910–914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fellnhofer, K. Game-based entrepreneurship education: Impact on attitudes, behaviours and intentions. World Rev. Entrep. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2018, 14, 205–228. [Google Scholar]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fripp, J. A future for business simulations. J. Eur. Ind. Train. 1997, 21, 138–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garrison, R.; Cleveland-Innes, M. Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. Am. J. Distance Educ. 2005, 19, 133–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Godfrey, P.; Illes, L.; Berry, G. Creating breadth in business education through service-learning. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 2005, 4, 309–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zbick, J.; Nake, I.; Milrad, M.; Jansen, M. A web-based framework to design and deploy mobile learning activities: Evaluating its usability, learnability and acceptance. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 15th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), Hualien, Taiwan, 6–9 July 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Grimley, A.; Green, R.; Nilsen, T.; Thompson, D. Using computer games for instruction: The Student experience. J. Interact. Learn. Res. 2011, 12, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hägg, G.; Gabrielsson, J. A systematic literature review of the evolution of pedagogy in entrepreneurial education research. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2019, 16, 1355–2554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamida, A.A.; Razak, F.Z.A.; Bakar, A.A.; Abdullah, W.S.W. The Effects of Perceived Usefulness and Perceived Ease of Use on Continuance Intention to Use E-Government. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2016, 35, 644–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Harasim, L. Shift Happens: Online Education as a New Paradigm in Learning. Internet High. Educ. 2000, 3, 41–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hart, M.; Porter, G. The impact of cognitive and other factors on the perceived usefulness of OLAP. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 2004, 45, 47–56. [Google Scholar]
- Healy, S.; Block, M.; Judg, J. Certified adapted physical educators’ perceptions of advantages and disadvantages of online teacher development. Res. Appl. 2014, 28, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Hidayah, N.; Farumananda, F.P.; Putra, N.M.D.; Sugianto, S. Problem Based Learning with Metakognitive Strategy to Improve Concept Understanding. J. Innov. Sci. Educ. 2019, 8, 555749. [Google Scholar]
- Hong, S.; Thong, J.; Tam, K. Understanding continued information technology usage behavior: A comparison of three models in the context of mobile internet. Decis. Support Syst. 2006, 42, 1819–1834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hughes, S.; Scholtz, F. Increasing the impact of a business simulation: The role of reflection. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2015, 13, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hung, S.-Y.; Tsai, J.C.-A.; Chou, S.-T. Decomposing perceived playfulness: A contextual examination of two social networking sites. Inf. Manag. 2016, 53, 698–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, G.-J.; Tsai, C.-C. Research trends in mobile and ubiquitous learning: A review of publications. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2011, 42, 65–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, L.; Palumbo, D.; Brown, D. Coronavirus: A visual guide to the economic impact. Coronavirus Outbreak 2020, 57, 24–44. [Google Scholar]
- Kabilan, M.; Norlida, A.; Abidin, M. Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? Internet High. Educ. 2010, 13, 179–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lainema, T.; Lainema, K. Advancing acquisition of business know-how: Critical learning elements. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 2007, 40, 183–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- King, M.; Newman, R. Evaluating business simulation software: Approach, tools and pedagogy. Horizon 2009, 17, 268–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- King, W.; He, J.; King, W.; He, J. A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Inf. Manag. 2006, 43, 740–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kotini, I.; Tzelepi, S. A Gamification-Based Framework for Developing Learning Activities of Computational Thinking. Gamification Educ. Bus. 2014, 5, 219–252. [Google Scholar]
- Kuvaas, B.; Buch, R.; Weibel, A.; Dysvik, A.; Nerstad, C.G.L. Do intrinsic and extrinsic motivation relate differently to employee outcomes? J. Econ. Psychol. 2017, 61, 244–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Popil, I.; Dillard-Thompson, D. A game-based strategy for the staff development of home health care nurses. J. Contin. Educ. Nurs. 2015, 46, 205–207. [Google Scholar]
- Lambić, D. Correlation between Facebook use for educational purposes and academic performance of students. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 61, 313–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lean, J.; Moizer, J.; Towler, M.; Abbey, C. Simulations and games. Act. Learn. High. Educ. 2006, 7, 227–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J. The Effects of Knowledge Sharing on Individual Creativity in Higher Education Institutions: Socio-Technical View. Adm. Sci. 2018, 8, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Leemkuil, H.; Jong, T.D.; Ootes, S. Review of educational games and simulations. Kits Consort. 2000, 5, 110–119. [Google Scholar]
- Liguori, E.; Winkler, C. From Offline to Online: Challenges and Opportunities for Entrepreneurship Education Following the COVID-19 Pandemic. Entrep. Educ. Pedagog. 2020, 3, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lin, Q.; Zhao, S.; Gao, D.; Lou, Y.; Yang, S.; Musa, S.S.; Wang, M.H.; Cai, Y.; Wang, L.; He, D. A conceptual model for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in Wuhan, China with individual reaction and governmental action. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2020, 93, 211–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, T.C. Using classroom game play in introductory microeconomics to enhance business student learning and lecture attendance. J. Educ. Bus. 2018, 93, 295–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, C.-H.; Huan, Y.-M. An empirical investigation of computer simulation technology acceptance to explore the factors that affect user intention. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2015, 14, 449–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.W.; Mendlinger, S. Perceived self-efficacy and its effect on online learning acceptance and student satisfaction. J. Serv. Sci. Manag. 2011, 4, 243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Loon, M.; Evans, J.; Kerridge, C. Reprint: Learning with a strategic management simulation game: Case study. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2015, 5, 120–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- MacIntyre, R. Flight Centre closes 100 stores across Australia due to business impact from coronavirus fears. Flight Cent. Will Close 2020, 29, 1–18. [Google Scholar]
- Mardani, A.; Nikoosokhan, S.; Moradi, M.; Doustar, M. The relationship between knowledge management and innovation performance. J. High Technol. Manag. Res. 2018, 29, 12–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosu, S.; Dragoi, G.; Guran, M. A knowledge management scenario to support knowledge applications development in small and medium enterprises. Adv. Electr. Comput. Eng. 2009, 9, 8–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nale, R.; Rauch, D.; Wathen, S.; Barr, P. An exploratory look at the use of importance-performance analysis as a curricular assessment tool in a school of business. J. Workplace Learn. 2000, 12, 139–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mergendoller, J.R.; Maxwell, N.L.; Bellisimo, Y. The Effectiveness of Preness of Problem-Based Instruction: A Comparative Study of Instructional Methods and Student Characteristics. J. Probl. Based Learn. 2006, 1, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
- Merwe, L.V. Scenario-based strategy in practice: A framework. Adv. Dev. Hum. Resour. 2008, 10, 216–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mintzberg, H.; Gosling, J. Educating managers beyond borders. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 2002, 1, 64–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.; Anderson, R.; Tatham, L.; Black, W. Multivariate Data Analysis; Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Hamari, J.; Shernoff, D.J.; Rowe, E.; Coller, B.; Asbellclarke, J.; Edwards, T. Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 54, 170–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prompetchara, E.; Ketloy, C.; Palaga, T. Immune responses in COVID-19 and potential vaccines: Lessons learned from SARS and MERS epidemic. Asian Pac. J. Allergy Immunol. 2020, 38, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- OECD. Global Economy Faces Gravest Threat since the Crisis as Coronavirus; OECD: Paris, France, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Pando-Garcia, J.; Periañez-Cañadillas, I.; Charterina, J. Business simulation games with and without supervision: An analysis based on the TAM model. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 69, 1731–1736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miles, J.; Shevlin, M. A time and a place for incremental fit indices. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2007, 42, 869–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McIver, D.; Lepisto, D. Effects of knowledge management on unit performance: Examining the moderating role of tacitness and learnability. J. Knowl. Manag. 2017, 21, 796–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gold, A.; Malhotra, A.; Segars, A. Knowledge management: An organizational capabilities perspective. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2001, 18, 185–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quintana, S.; Maxwell, S. Implications of recent developments in structural equation modeling for counseling psychology. Couns. Psychol. 1999, 27, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahn, D.; Rehg, M. Getting real with experiential: Get your students launched in the very next entrepreneurship course you teach. Dev. Bus. Simul. Exp. Learn. 2014, 41, 22–36. [Google Scholar]
- Stame, N. Theory-based evaluation and types of complexity. In Evaluation, TATA Interactive Systems; Business Simulation Game, TOPSIM-Startup: Tübingen, Germany, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, F.D.; Bagozzi, R.; Warshaw, P.R. Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace1. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 1992, 22, 111–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, C.; Ma, L. Computers in Human Behavior News sharing in social media: The effect of gratifications and prior experience. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 331–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moon, J.; Kim, Y. Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Inf. Manag. 2001, 38, 217–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hidayanto, A.; Setyady, S. Impact of collaborative tools utilization ongroup performance in university students. Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol. 2014, 13, 88–98. [Google Scholar]
- Ali, Z.; Gongbing, B.; Mehreen, A. Understanding and predicting academic performance through cloud computing adoption: A perspective of technology acceptance model. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2018, 5, 85–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarwar, B.; Zulfiqar, S.; Aziz, S.; Chandia, K.E. Usage of Social Media Tools for Collaborative Learning: The Effect on Learning Success with the Moderating Role of Cyberbullying. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2019, 57, 1157–1176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Solesvik, M.; Westhead, P.; Kolvereid, L.; Matlay, H. Student intentions to become self-employed: The Ukrainian context. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2012, 19, 441–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.; Lee, C.; Elias, T. Factors affecting information sharing in social networking sites amongst university students: Application of the knowledge-sharing model to social networking sites. Online Inf. Rev. 2015, 39, 290–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spector, P.; Brannick, M. The nature and effects of method variance in organizational research. Int. Rev. Ind. Organ. Psychol. 1995, 10, 249–274. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson, J.C.; Gerbing, D.W. Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach. Psychol. Bull. 1988, 103, 411–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tan, H. China’s travel restrictions amid coronavirus outbreak will hit other Asian economies. Asia Econ. 2020, 7, 59. [Google Scholar]
- Thavikulwat, P. The architecture of computerized business gaming simulations. Simul. Gaming 2004, 2, 242–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Thong, J.; Hong, S.-J.; Tam, K. The effects of post-adoption beliefs on the expectation confirmation model for information technology continuance. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2006, 64, 799–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tüzün, H.; Soylu, M.Y.; Yilmaz, T.K.; Inal, Y. The effects of computer games on primary school students’ achievement and motivation in geography learning. Comput. Educ. 2009, 52, 68–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNICEF. COVID-19 Educational Disruption and Response. Available online: https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse (accessed on 30 August 2020).
- Volery, T.; Lord, D. Critical success factors in online education. Int. J. Educ. Manag. 2002, 14, 216–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vygotsky, L. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychology Psychology; Cambridge Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1978. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, C.; Wong, P. Entrepreneurial interest of university students in Singapore. Technovation 2004, 24, 163–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wawer, M.; Milosz, M.; Muryjas, P.; Rzemieniak, M. Business Simulation Games in Forming of Students’ Entrepreneurship. Int. J. Euro-Mediterr. Stud. 2010, 3, 49–71. [Google Scholar]
- Webster, J.; Beehr, T.; Love, K. Extending the challenge-hindrance model of occupational stress: The role of appraisal. J. Vocat. Behav. 2011, 75, 239–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, M.L. Structural Equation Model-Use and Application of AMOS; Chongqing University Press: Chongqing, China, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Wu, F.; Zhao, S.; Yu, B.; Chen, Y.-M.; Wang, W.; Song, Z.-G.; Hu, Y.; Tao, Z.-W.; Tian, J.-H.; Pei, Y.-Y.; et al. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China. Nature 2020, 579, 1–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Characteristics of Business Simulation Games (BSG) | Explanation | References |
---|---|---|
Clear Goals | Goals are very clearly defined to players | [31] |
Time Constraint | Games is for the limited period | [32] |
Limited resources | Players of the games have limited financing to start the game | [33] |
Participative | Players need to actively participate | [25] |
Interactive | Collaboration with all team members is an essential part | [31] |
Inductive | Decision-based on the logics and reasons | [33] |
Explorative | Consider all the flaws and objections and then make a decision | [34] |
Reflective | Be judgmental while making the decision | [34] |
Demographics | Items | Time Lag 1 2 July 2020 | Time Lag 2 13 August 2020 |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 65% | 67.5% |
Female | 35% | 32.5% | |
Age | 20–22 | 9% | 13% |
22–24 | 91% | 87% | |
Education | Under Graduate | 96.33 | 92.33 |
Total | 289 | 277 |
Constructors | Scales | Factor Loading | Cronbach Alpha | CR | AVE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Perceived Pleasure | PP1 | 0.726 | 0.955 | 0.956 | 0.878 |
PP2 | 0.716 | ||||
PP3 | 0.693 | ||||
Knowledge Sharing | KS1 | 0.852 | 0.981 | 0.982 | 0.915 |
KS2 | 0.861 | ||||
KS3 | 0.775 | ||||
Self-Efficacy | S1 | 0.861 | 0.976 | 0.976 | 0.931 |
S2 | 0.869 | ||||
S3 | 0.888 | ||||
Knowledge Application | KA1 | 0.799 | 0.977 | 0.977 | 0.895 |
KA2 | 0.813 | ||||
KA3 | 0.788 | ||||
KA4 | 0.803 | ||||
Learning Performance | LP1 | 0.674 | 0.961 | 0.961 | 0.892 |
LP2 | 0.726 | ||||
LP3 | 0.732 | ||||
Perceived Usefulness | PEU1 | 0.767 | 0.967 | 0.968 | 0.884 |
PEU2 | 0.735 | ||||
PEU3 | 0.735 | ||||
PEU4 | 0.707 | ||||
Learnability | L1 | 0.819 | 0.989 | 0.990 | 0.951 |
L2 | 0.805 | ||||
L3 | 0.823 | ||||
L4 | 0.816 | ||||
L5 | 0.808 | ||||
Perceived Ease of Use | PEOU1 | 0.810 | 0.972 | 0.972 | 0.920 |
PEOU2 | 0.798 | ||||
PEOU3 | 0.790 | ||||
Technology Adoption | TA1 | 0.752 | 0.973 | 0.974 | 0.926 |
TA2 | 0.728 | ||||
TA3 | 0.733 | ||||
Entrepreneurial Intention | EI1 | 0.792 | 0.899 | 0.891 | 0.733 |
Entrepreneurial Intention | EI2 | 0.753 | |||
Entrepreneurial Intention | EI3 | 0.751 |
Constructs | M(SD) | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Perceived Pleasure | 4.96 (1.24) | 0.937 | |||||||||
Knowledge Sharing | 4.95 (1.42) | 0.630 | 0.957 | ||||||||
Learnability | 4.59 (1.40) | 0.716 | 0.639 | 0.975 | |||||||
Knowledge Application | 4.98 (1.18) | 0.686 | 0.595 | 0.666 | 0.946 | ||||||
Perceived Usefulness | 5.01 (1.24) | 0.640 | 0.645 | 0.679 | 0.672 | 0.940 | |||||
Self-Efficacy | 5.10 (1.43) | 0.573 | 0.429 | 0.490 | 0.601 | 0.533 | 0.965 | ||||
Perceived Ease of Use | 5.22 (0.912) | 0.663 | 0.573 | 0.628 | 0.600 | 0.695 | 0.503 | 0.959 | |||
Technology Adoption | 5.43 (1.22) | 0.677 | 0.639 | 0.671 | 0.651 | 0.747 | 0.485 | 0.678 | 0.962 | ||
Learning Performance | 5.22 (1.31) | 0.774 | 0.614 | 0.676 | 0.718 | 0.684 | 0.635 | 0.624 | 0.651 | 0.945 | |
Entrepreneurial Intention | 5.26 (1.38) | 0.491 | 0.372 | 0.398 | 0.389 | 0.563 | 0.576 | 0.585 | 0.443 | 0.493 | 0.856 |
The Goodness of Fit Model | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Indices | Benchmark values | Measurement Model | Structural Model | |
Chi-square | () | ≤3 | 2.253 | 3.123 |
Tucker–Lewis index | TLI | ≥0.95 | 0.980 | 0.963 |
Incremental fit index | IFI | ≥0.95 | 0.983 | 0.967 |
Comparative fit index | CFI | ≥0.95 | 0.983 | 0.967 |
Normed fit index (NFI). | NFI | ≥0.95 | 0.968 | 0.952 |
Root mean square root error of approximation | RMSEA | ≤0.08 | 0.048 | 0.062 |
Hypothesis | Overall Sample | Online Classes | Business Simulation | Results | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | Learnability → PU | 0.427 *** | 0.200 *** | 0.254 *** | Fully Supported |
H2 | Knowledge Sharing → PU | 0.066 (na) | 0.113 * | 0.297 *** | Fully Supported |
H3 | Knowledge Application → PU | 0.145 ** | 0.168 ** | 0.415 *** | Fully Supported |
H4 | Self-efficacy → PEOU | 0.151 *** | 0.003 (na) | 0.297 *** | Supported for Business Simulation |
H5 | Perceived Pleasure → PEOU | 0.691 *** | 0.053 (na) | 0.514 *** | Supported for Business Simulation |
H6 | PEU → Technology Adoption. | 0.140 *** | 0.274 *** | 0.634 *** | Fully Supported |
H7 | PEOU → Technology Adoption | 0.657 *** | 0.119 (na) | 0.218 *** | Supported for Business Simulation Games |
H8 | Technology Adoption → Learning Performance | 0.934 *** | 0.121 (na) | 0.566 *** | Supported for Business Simulation Games |
H9 | Technology Adoption → Entrepreneurial Intention | 0.253 *** | 0.085 | 0.303 *** | Supported for Business Simulation Games |
Perceived Usefulness | 0.595 | 0.171 | 0.548 | ||
Perceived Ease of Use | 0.480 | 0.002 | 0.452 | ||
Technology Adoption | 0.590 | 0.081 | 0.662 | ||
Learning Performance | 0.419 | 0.011 | 0.265 | ||
Entrepreneurial Intention | 0.443 | 0.073 | 0.283 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zulfiqar, S.; Al-reshidi, H.A.; Al Moteri, M.A.; Feroz, H.M.B.; Yahya, N.; Al-Rahmi, W.M. Understanding and Predicting Students’ Entrepreneurial Intention through Business Simulation Games: A Perspective of COVID-19. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1838. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041838
Zulfiqar S, Al-reshidi HA, Al Moteri MA, Feroz HMB, Yahya N, Al-Rahmi WM. Understanding and Predicting Students’ Entrepreneurial Intention through Business Simulation Games: A Perspective of COVID-19. Sustainability. 2021; 13(4):1838. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041838
Chicago/Turabian StyleZulfiqar, Salman, Hamad A. Al-reshidi, Moteeb A. Al Moteri, Hafiz Muhammad Basit Feroz, Noraffandy Yahya, and Waleed Mugahed Al-Rahmi. 2021. "Understanding and Predicting Students’ Entrepreneurial Intention through Business Simulation Games: A Perspective of COVID-19" Sustainability 13, no. 4: 1838. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041838
APA StyleZulfiqar, S., Al-reshidi, H. A., Al Moteri, M. A., Feroz, H. M. B., Yahya, N., & Al-Rahmi, W. M. (2021). Understanding and Predicting Students’ Entrepreneurial Intention through Business Simulation Games: A Perspective of COVID-19. Sustainability, 13(4), 1838. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041838