Education and Information Technologies

, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 359–384 | Cite as

QR code utilization in a large classroom: Higher education students’ initial perceptions

  • Siti Nazleen Abdul RabuEmail author
  • Haniza Hussin
  • Brandford Bervell


The integration of Quick Response (QR) codes in classrooms have been identified as an important tool in promoting active as well as distributed learning, especially in higher education. Even though the versatility of this technology within the educational milieu cannot be over-emphasized, the initial perceptions of students who are at the centre of QR integration are important towards achieving the prospects of this technology in the pedagogical process, particularly in a large classroom context. Against this backdrop, Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology2 (UTAUT2) were employed as theoretical foundation to study students’ perceptions. A questionnaire was used to collect data from 200 students, based on a purposive sampling technique with Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) employed for statistical analysis. Initial results suggested that students had very positive attitudes towards QR code utilization for course related activities which ultimately determined their intentions to accept this technology. However, their positive attitude was anchored on their perceived usefulness and easiness towards QR code which were promoted by perceived playfulness, facilitating conditions and hedonic motivation respectively. The social influence variable was not a predictive factor of students’ perception towards the usefulness of QR codes. The study provided practical examples of how QR codes can be integrated in teaching and also recommended future experimental research into QR code effectiveness as well as instructor acceptance if the technology is to be integrated on a wider national scale.


Quick response (QR) code Integration Large classroom Active and collaborative learning Acceptance 



We acknowledge all the students who participated at their freewill in this study.


  1. Abas, H. , Yahya, F. H., & Kamaruddin, M. (2015). User readiness evaluation of QR Codes in mobile learning (m-Learning). Proceeding of IC-ITS 2015 e-ISBN:978–967–0850-07-8 International Conference on Information Technology & Society 8–9 June 2015, Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA 126.Google Scholar
  2. Abdullah, A. M., & Aziz, R. H. A. (2014). Evaluating the use of Quick Response (QR) code at Sulaimani University libraries. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Software Engineering, 4(11), 62–72.Google Scholar
  3. Adams, D. A., Nelson, R. R., & Todd, P. A. (1992). Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: A replication. MIS Quarterly, 16(2), 227–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ali, N., Santos, I. M., & Areepattamannil, S. (2017). Pre-service teachers’ perception of quick response (QR) code integration in classroom activities. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 93–100.Google Scholar
  5. Babin, B. J., Darden, W. R., & Griffin, M. (1994). Work and or fun: Measuring hedonic and utilitarian shopping value. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 644–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bervell, B., & Umar, I. N. (2017a). A decade of LMS acceptance and adoption research in sub-Sahara African higher education: A systematic review of models, methodologies, milestones and main challenges. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(11), 7269–7286.Google Scholar
  7. Bervell, B., & Umar, I. N. (2017b). Validation of the UTAUT model: Re-considering non-linear relationships of Exogeneous variables in higher education technology acceptance research. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(10), 6471–6490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, M. E., Treviño, L. K., & Harrison, D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: A social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 117–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen, N., Teng, D., & Lee, C. (2010). Augmenting paper-based reading activities with mobile technology to enhance reading comprehension. Proceedings of the 6th IEEE international conference on wireless, mobile, and ubiquitous Technologies in Education (pp. 201-203).
  10. Chung, J., & Tan, F. B. (2004). Antecedents of perceived playfulness. An exploratory study on user acceptance of general information-searching websites. Information & Management, 4(7), 869–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Conci, M., Pianesi, F., & Zancanaro, M. (2009). Useful, social and enjoyable: Mobile phone adoption by older people. Human-computer interaction–INTERACT, 2009, 63–76.Google Scholar
  12. Crompton, H., LaFrance, J. & van’t Hoof, M. (2012). QR codes 101. Learning & Leading with Technology, 22–23.Google Scholar
  13. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Donaldson, R.L., (2011). Student acceptance of mobile learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, FloridaStateUniversity:Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
  16. Donaldson, R. L., Hashemi, M., Azizinezhad, M., Najafi, V., & Nesari, A. J. (2011). What is Mobile Learning? Challenges and Capabilities. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 2477–2481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. El-Gayar, O., Moran, M., & Hawkes, M. (2011). Students’ acceptance of tablet PCs and implications for educ ational institutions. Educational Technology & Society, 14(2), 58–70.Google Scholar
  18. Eyuboglu, K., & Sevim, U. (2016). Determinants of consumers adoption to shopping with QR code in Turkey. Journal of International Social Research, 9, 1830–1830. Scholar
  19. Farahat, T. (2012). Applying the technology acceptance model to online learning in the Egyptian universities. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 64, 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fathema, N., Shannon, D., & Ross, M. (2015). Expanding the technology acceptance model (TAM) to examine faculty use of learning management systems (LMSs) in higher education institutions. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 210–232 Retrieved from Scholar
  21. Ferguson, J. M. (2016). Middle school students’ reactions to a 1:1 iPad initiative and a paperless curriculum. Education and Information Technologies. Advance online publication.
  22. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 1, 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Foster, G. (2014). Students' response to the use of QR Codes to encourage participation in an introductory Programming Module. SACLA 2014, 25–26 June, Port Elizabeth, South Africa.Google Scholar
  24. Gradel, K., & Edson, J. E. (2012). QR codes in higher education: Fad or functional tool? Journal Educational Technology Systems, 41(1), 45–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hair, J. F., Gabriel, M., & Patel, V. (2014). AMOS covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM): Guidelines on its application as a marketing research tool. Revista Brasileira de Marketing, 13(2), 44–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Hau, G. B., Siraj, S., Alias, N., Rauf, R. A. A., & Zakaria, A. (2013). Research and trends in the field of technology-enhanced learning from 2006 to 2011: A content analysis of quick response code (QR-code) and its application in selected studies. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 1(1), 54–72.Google Scholar
  29. Ifenthaler, D., & Schweinbenz, V. (2016). Students' acceptance of tablet pcs in the classroom. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(4), 306–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jiin, J., Chyou, T., Yu, B., & Cheng, F. (2012). Acceptance of Qr code in Taiwan : An extension of the technology acceptance model. Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems (PACIS), 12.Google Scholar
  31. Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling methodology in the social sciences (4th ed.). NY: Guilford Publication.Google Scholar
  32. Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration (IJeC), 11(4), 1–10.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lai, H. C., Chang, C. Y., Wen-Shiane, L., Fan, Y. L., & Wu, Y. T. (2013). The implementation of mobile learning in outdoor education: Application of QR codes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), E57–E62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Latif, L. A., Fadzil, M., Munira, T. A., & San, N. M. (2012). Can the use of QR codes enhance m-learning in a blended learning environment? Journal Lifelong Learning Society, 8(2), 1–20 ISSN: 1738-0057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Law, C.-Y., & So, S. (2010). QR codes in education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange (JETDE), 3(1).Google Scholar
  36. Liébana-Cabanillas, F., Ramos de Luna, I., & Montoro-Ríos, F. J. (2015). User behaviour in QR mobile payment system: The QR payment acceptance model. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(9), 1031–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lo, H. (2014). Quick response codes around us: Personality traits, attitudes toward innovation, and acceptance. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 15, 35–39.Google Scholar
  38. Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 173–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nassuora, A. B. (2012). Student acceptance of mobile learning for higher education. American Academic & Scholarly Research Journal, 4, 0–5.Google Scholar
  40. Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Parra, D., Verdugo, R., García-Galleguillos, G., & Nussbaum, M. (2016). UsingQRcodes to increase user engagement in museum-like spaces. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pillai, A. E., Prakash, D., Al-Marhoobi, N. A., & Shrivastava, M. (2017). Application of QR codes in tourism industry: A review of literature. International Journal of Computer Technology & Applications, 8(6), 678–687.Google Scholar
  42. Rivers, D. (2009). Utilizing the quick response (QR) code within a Japanese EFL environment. JALTCALL Journal, 5(2), 15–28.Google Scholar
  43. Robertson, C., & Green, T. (2012). Scanning the potential for using QR codes in the classroom. Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 56(2), 11–12. Scholar
  44. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  45. Rouillard, J. (2008). “Contextual QR codes,” Proc. -3rd Int. Multi-Conf. Comput. Glob. Inf. Technol. ICCGI 2008 Conjunction with ComP2P 2008 1st Int. Work. Comput. P2P Networks Theory Practice., pp. 50–55, 2008.Google Scholar
  46. Ryu, J. S., & Murdock, K. (2013). Consumer acceptance of mobile marketing communications using the QR code. Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 15(2), 111–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sampson, T. (2012). QR codes in the classroom. Retrieved from to mersatisfation/qr-codes-in-the-classroom.
  48. Santos, J. F. (2015). QR code adoption and mobile marketing practices in Portugal: An empirical study. International journal of marketing, communication and new media, 3(5).Google Scholar
  49. Saprudin, A. A., Goolamally, N., & Latif, L. A. (2014). Embedding QR codes in the teaching and learning process.Google Scholar
  50. So, S., (2010). “Beyond the simple codes?: QR codes in pp: 114–118. education,” in In Ascilite Conference Changing 24. Becker C. and C. Bizer, “DBpedia Mobile?: A Demands, Changing Directions, pp: 1157–1161.Google Scholar
  51. Tajudeen, S. A., Basha, M. K., Michael, F. O., & Mukthar, A. L. (2013). Determinant of mobile devices acceptance for learning among students in developing country. The Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 1(3), 17–29.Google Scholar
  52. Tan, F. B., & Chou, J. P. C. (2008). The relationship between mobile service quality, perceived technology compatibility, and Users' perceived playfulness in the context of mobile information and entertainment services, Intl. Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 24(7), 649–671. Scholar
  53. Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Quarterly, 15(1), 125–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thorne, T. (2016). Augmenting classroom practices with QR codes. TESOL Journal, 7(3), 746–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tseng, M. H., & Wu, H. C. (2014). A cloud medication safety support system using QR code and web services for elderly outpatients. Technology and Health Care, 22(1), 99–113.Google Scholar
  56. Ursavaş, Ö. F. (2015). The influence of hedonic and utilitarian motivations on teachers behavioral intention to use tablet PCs. Education and Science, 40(179), 25–43.Google Scholar
  57. van Deursen, A. J. A. M., ben Allouch, S., & Ruijter, L. P. (2016). Tablet use in primary education: Adoption hurdles and attitude determinants. Education and Information Technologies, 21, 971–990. Scholar
  58. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27(3), 451–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 45(2), 186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Venkatesh, V., Morris, G. B. & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27.Google Scholar
  61. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wang, Y.-S., Wu, M.-C., & Wang, H.-Y. (2009). Investigating the determinants and age and gender differences in the acceptance of mobile learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 92–118. Scholar
  64. Yusof, S., Goolamally, N., Latif, L. A. & Fadzil, M. (2012). Using QR codes in enhancing learning in elementary statistics. In 12th international conference of information (ICI12), 12–13 December 2012, Kuala Lumpur, 312–321.Google Scholar
  65. Zhu, Q., Guo, W., & Hu, Y. (2012). Mobile learning in higher education. Jönköping University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Siti Nazleen Abdul Rabu
    • 1
    Email author
  • Haniza Hussin
    • 1
  • Brandford Bervell
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Instructional Technology and MultimediaUniversiti Sains MalaysiaGelugorMalaysia
  2. 2.College of Distance Education, E-learning & Technology UnitUniversity of Cape CoastCape CoastGhana

Personalised recommendations