Authors : Chanbopheak Nguon; Dhakir Abbas Ali

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 9 - September

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/4uc3n2st

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/4pekmsj2

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25sep239

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : This study investigates the impact of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) integration, specifically ICT accessibility and ICT attitudes and beliefs on students’ learning outcomes in Cambodian public higher education institutions. Grounded in a quantitative research design, data were collected from 326 valid students’ responses across three major public universities. Structural Equation Modeling using SmartPLS 3.0 was employed to evaluate both the measurement and structural model. Results indicate that both ICT accessibility and ICT attitude and belief have statistically significant positive effects on student learning outcomes. ICT accessibility exhibited a stronger influence (β = 0.345, t = 7.500, p = 0.000) compared to ICT attitude and belief (β = 0.197, t = 3.678, p = 0.000). Despite these significant relationships, the structural model yielded a relatively low explanatory power, with R2 = 0.198 and adjusted R2 = 0.193, suggesting that ICT- related factors account for roughly 19.8% of the variance in learning outcomes. Effect size analysis showed small contributions from ICT accessibility (f2 = 0.135) and ICT attitude and beliefs (f2 = 0.043). Model fit was confirmed with SRMR = 0.069, well below the 0.10 threshold. The findings underscore the importance of both equitable ICT access and the cultivation of positive digital attitudes in enhancing educational outcomes. However, ICT alone does not sufficiency. Broader pedagogical and institutional reforms are essential to maximize the benefits of digital integration in Cambodian higher education.

Keywords : Information and Communication Technology, ICT Accessibility, Student Attitude and Belief, Cambodian Higher Education, Learning Outcomes.

References :

1. Alhassan, M. D., & Adam, I. O. (2021). The effects of digital inclusion and ICT access on the quality of life: A global perspective. Elsevier, 64, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101511
2. Al-Rahmi, A. M., Al-Rahmi, W. M., Alturki, U., Aldraiweesh, A., Almutairy, S., & Al-Adwan, A. S. (2022). Acceptance of mobile technologies and M-learning by university students: An empirical investigation in higher education. Springer, 27(6), 7805–7826. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10639-022-10934-8
3. Alzahrani, L. (2023). Analyzing students’ attitudes and behavior toward artificial intelligence technologies in higher education. Researchgate.Net, 11(6), 2277–3878. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijrte.F7475.0311623
4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
5. Banerjee, A., & Chaudhury, S. (2010). Statistics without tears: Populations and samples. Industrial Psychiatry Journal, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-6748.77642
6. Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (pp. 1–15).
7. Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In Modern methods for business research (Issue 2, pp. 295–336).
8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences Second Edition (2nd ed.). LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES.
9. Creswell, J., & Creswell, J. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc. https://www.ucg.ac.me/skladiste/blog_609332/objava_105202/fajlovi/Creswell.pdf
10. Fernández-Gutiérrez, M., Gimenez, G., & Calero, J. (2020). Is the use of ICT in education leading to higher student outcomes? Analysis from the Spanish Autonomous Communities. Elsevier, 157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103969
11. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382. https://doi.org/10.2307/3150980
12. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, Marko. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage.
13. Henseler, J., Dijkstra, T. K., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Diamantopoulos, A., Straub, D. W., Ketchen, D. J., Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., & Calantone, R. J. (2014a). Common beliefs and reality about partial least squares: comments on Rönkkö and Evermann. Organizational Research Methods, 17(2), 182–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114526928
14. Henseler, J., Dijkstra, T. K., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Diamantopoulos, A., Straub, D. W., Ketchen, D. J., Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., & Calantone, R. J. (2014b). Common beliefs and reality about PLS: Comments on Rönkkö and Evermann (2013). Organizational Research Methods, 17(2), 182–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114526928
15. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). Testing measurement invariance of composites using partial least squares. International Marketing Review, 33(3), 405–431. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2014-0304/FULL/HTML
16. Henseler, J., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Goodness-of-fit indices for partial least squares path modeling. Springer, 28, 565–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/S00180-+012-0317-1
17. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
18. Iwadi, I. M., Ali, D. A., & Jabari, M. (2024). Artificial Intelligence Techniques and Their Role in Enhancing the Competitive Advantage of Palestinian Schools. Palestine Ahliya University Journal for Research and Studies, 03(2), 120–135.
19. Jing, T., & Ali, D. A. (2024a). Exploring The Relationship Between Faculty Engagement And Institutional Performance: A Case Study Approach In Jiangxi’s Universities. Sciences of Conservation and Archaeology, 36(3), 486–491. https://doi.org/10.48141/sci-arch-37.2.24.56
20. Jing, T., & Ali, D. A. (2024b). THE INFLUENCE OF CRM AND ORGANIZATIONAL AGILITY ON CAREER OUTCOMES: A STUDY IN JIANGXI HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS. Globus Journal of Progressive Education, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.46360/globus.edu.220241018
21. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308
22. Kulal, A., Dinesh, S., Abhishek, N., & Anchan, A. (2024). Digital access and learning outcomes: a study of equity and inclusivity in distance education. International Journal of Educational Management, 38(5), 1391–1423. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-03-2024-0166/FULL/HTML
23. Latorre-Cosculluela, C., Sierra-Sánchez, V., Rivera-Torres, P., & Liesa-Orús, M. (2023). ICT efficacy and response to different needs in university classrooms: effects on attitudes and active behaviour towards technology. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 36(2), 350–367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-023-09357-2
24. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). An overview of psychological measurement. Springer, 97–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-2490-4_4
25. Okoye, K., Hussein, H., Arrona-Palacios, A., Quintero, H. N., Ortega, L. O. P., Sanchez, A. L., Ortiz, E. A., Escamilla, J., & Hosseini, S. (2023). Impact of digital technologies upon teaching and learning in higher education in Latin America: an outlook on the reach, barriers, and bottlenecks. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 2291–2360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11214-1
26. Pan, L., Haq, S. ul, Shi, X., & Nadeem, M. (2024). The impact of digital competence and personal innovativeness on the learning behavior of students: exploring the moderating role of digitalization in higher education. Journals.Sagepub.Com, 14(3), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241265919
27. Peng, Z., & Ali, D. (2025). LEADERSHIP AND CAREER PLANNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION: A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THEIR IMPACT ON STUDENT SUCCESS. An International Journal of Management, 14(2), 32. https://doi.org/10.46360/cosmos.mgt.420251007
28. Saks, K. (2024). The effect of self-efficacy and self-set grade goals on academic outcomes. Front. Psychol., 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1324007
29. Su, X., & Ali, D. A. (2024). Education Level and Experience Moderates the Effects of Gender Discrimination on Employee Compensation at Taizhou Universities. Frontiers in Health Informatics, 13(8), 3501.
30. Yang, Y. (2023). Impact of organizational support on students’ information and communication technology self-efficacy, engagement, and satisfaction in a blended learning. Journals.Sagepub.Com, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231216527