Common use of Methods and Materials Clause in Contracts

Methods and Materials. The current study employed quantitative method to examine factors of TAM toward ICT use for English language learning. Besides, it investigated students' activities related to the usage of ICT for general and English language learning purposes. This study used a convenience sample of 303 student teachers of the English Department at a state university in Jambi, Indonesia. The the participants are all student teachers majoring English from the first-year to the fourth-year students enrolled in 2020. The student teachers had formally learned English for three years at secondary school level, three years at high school level, and continue to study English courses as well as receive instruction through the medium of English during their undergraduate study at university. Two hundred thirty-seven respondents are were female (78.2%), and sixty-six respondents are were male (21.8%). The primary instrument to collect data in this study was a questionnaire. The online questionnaire survey was developed by the researchers based on the research question and previous related studies in a close-ended format, and distributed to all of the respondents. The developed questionnaire consists of 33 items. The first section elicited background information of the respondents including gender, academic years, ICT devices ownership, the use of ICT for English learning purposes, and their activities in using ICT for English learning purposes (5 items). The second section entailed the variables of TAM in using ICT for English language learning, which included equipment (Eq), 2 items (adapted from Sabti & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2014); motivation (Mo), 2 items (adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2014); ICT skills (Sk), 3 items (adapted from Sabti & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2014); perceived ease of use (PEoU), 5 items (adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1989; Park, 2009; and Venkatesh & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2000); perceived usefulness (PU), 5 items (adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1989; Park, 2009, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2000); attitude (At), 3 items (adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1989; Park, 2009, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2000); and actual use (AU), 4 items (adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1989; ▇▇▇▇, 2009, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2000), with four-point Likert-type scales, from 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree. Before administering the instrument questionnaire in this study, a representative group (25 students) who were not involved in the main study were piloted to allow the researchers to identify and adjust the instrument. Expert judgment and literature review were employed in developing the questionnaire validity. For the content validity, the questionnaire was validated by two experts in the field of ICT in face-to-face discussions to make sure the relevance and overall quality of each item in the questionnaire. Modifications, including the layout, the scale, and language translation of the questionnaire were made. Considering that the student teachers (ranged from Year 1 to Year 4) possessed varying levels of English proficiency, a combined three-step (i.e., forward translation, review, and back translation) adaptation method was employed to produce a reliable Indonesian version of the questionnaire. Besides, we also used convergent validity and discriminant validity for the instrument. The result of convergent validity was the outer loading’s score of each construct > 0.7, and the AVE’s score > 0.5. It means that the constructs of the instrument in this study were valid. Discriminant validity was done by using the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ criterion. The score of Actual Use (AU), Attitude (At), Equipment (Eq), ICT Skills (Sk), Motivation (Mo), Perceived Ease of Use (PEoU), and Perceived Usefulness (PU) were 0.828, 0.808, 0.893, 0.879, 0.887, 0.805, 0.715, respectively. Each construct had a score > 0,7. It means that each construct is valid. The questionnaire items were translated into Indonesian language to ensure the respondents understand each item being asked. The data collected through the online questionnaire (using Google Form) were coded by researchers. First, the data were put in an MS Excel program. Then, they were transferred to SmartPLS3 Windows version 3.2.9 was employed. SmartPLS3 program (version 3.2.9) to get descriptive statistic which covers mean, standard deviation, frequency, percent, and correlation. To test the hypotheses by Partial Least Squares - Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM),

Methods and Materials. The current study employed quantitative method to examine factors of TAM toward ICT use for English language learning. Besides, it investigated students' activities related to the usage of ICT for general and English language learning purposes. This study used a convenience sample of 303 student teachers of the English Department at a state university in Jambi, Indonesia. The the studentpre-service participants are all student teachers majoring English from the first-year to the fourth-year students enrolled in 2020. The student teachers had formally learned English for three years at secondary school level, three years at high school level, and continue to study English courses as well as receive instruction through the medium of English during their undergraduate study at university. Two hundred thirty-seven respondents are were female (78.2%), and sixty-six respondents are were male (21.8%). The primary instrument to collect data in this study was a questionnaire. The online developed questionnaire survey was developed modified by the researchers based on the research question and previous related studies in a close-ended format, and distributed to all of the respondents. The developed modified questionnaire consists of 33 items. The first section elicited background information of the respondents including gender, academic years, ICT devices ownership, the use of ICT for English learning purposes, and their activities in using ICT for English learning purposes (5 items). The second section entailed the variables of TAM in using ICT for English language learning, which included equipment (Eq), 2 items (adapted from Sabti & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2014); motivation (Mo), 2 items (adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2014); ICT skills (Sk), 3 items (adapted from Sabti & ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2014); perceived ease of use (PEoU), 5 items (adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1989; Park, 2009; and Venkatesh & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2000); perceived usefulness (PU), 5 items (adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1989; Park, 2009, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2000); attitude (At), 3 items (adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1989; Park, 2009, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2000); and actual use (AU), 4 items (adapted from ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 1989; ▇▇▇▇, 2009, and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇▇, 2000), with four-point Likert-type scales, from 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree. Before administering the instrument questionnaire in this study, a representative group (25 students) who were not involved in the main study were piloted to allow the researchers to identify and adjust the instrument. Expert judgment and literature review were employed in developing the questionnaire validity. For the content validity, the questionnaire was validated by two experts in the field of ICT in face-to-face discussions to make sure the relevance and overall quality of each item in the questionnaire. Modifications, including the layout, the scale, and language translation of the questionnaire were made. Considering that the student teachers (ranged from Year 1 to Year 4) possessed varying levels of English proficiency, a combined three-step (i.e., forward translation, review, and back translation) adaptation method was employed to produce a reliable Indonesian version of the questionnaire. Besides, we also used convergent validity and discriminant validity for the instrument. The result of convergent validity was the outer loading’s score of each construct > 0.7, and the AVE’s score > 0.5. It means that the constructs of the instrument in this study were valid. Discriminant validity was done by using the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ criterion. The score of Actual Use (AU), Attitude (At), Equipment (Eq), ICT Skills (Sk), Motivation (Mo), Perceived Ease of Use (PEoU), and Perceived Usefulness (PU) were 0.828, 0.808, 0.893, 0.879, 0.887, 0.805, 0.715, respectively. Each construct had a score > 0,7. It means that each construct is valid. The questionnaire items were translated into Indonesian language to ensure the respondents understand each item being asked. The data collected through the online questionnaire (using Google Form) were coded by researchers. First, the data were put in an MS Excel program. Then, they were transferred to SmartPLS3 Windows version 3.2.9 was employed. SmartPLS3 program (version 3.2.9) to get descriptive statistic which covers mean, standard deviation, frequency, percent, and correlation. To test the hypotheses by Partial Least Squares - Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM),.