Audiovisual productions in video format are becoming increasingly important in training. On the one hand, this can be explained by the possibilities that this resource offers to present concepts and allow the observation of phenomena, and the wide range of functions that it can perform in teaching, the lack of required maintenance, etc. On the other hand, thanks to digitization, these productions can be used in different media, thus becoming a “transmedia” resource as they are stored in specific repositories for constant viewing (Chien et al., 2020). These possibilities make this resource a very valid means to promote learning and create new scenarios for teaching (Brame, 2016; Cooley et al., 2020). At the same time, its multimedia capacity facilitates the transfer of information to long-term memory (Mayer, 2003; Zhang et al., 2019). Lastly, it favors the development of attention in the student (Arroyo-Barrigüete et al., 2019).

The use of video productions in distance training contexts and as part of virtual training actions is essential because of the audiovisual culture in which we live. This has also been shown by a number of different studies, which have made it clear that they boost student satisfaction and motivation, improving learning (Arroyo-Barrigüete et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2019; Rodríguez‐Ardura & Meseguer‐Artola, 2017).

One type of educational resource in video format is Polimedia. A Polimedia production can be defined as a virtual multimedia presentation in which a video recorded by the speaker is integrated into a virtual set and presents resources that the teacher requires. This involves different technologies such as presentations, videos, animations, writing on an electronic whiteboard, and working on applications in real time (Figure 1).

Figure 1

Visually, a Polimedia production is made up of two distinct parts. On the one hand, the teacher appears in a part of the screen. The rest of the screen is occupied by the presentation to which the teacher refers during his or her speech. Thus, the phases of a Polimedia production are presentation design, choice of virtual setting, and recording (Cabero, 2018).

A Polimedia production is considered a learning object to support teaching, with multimedia content created to strengthen and complement teaching. The Polimedia management and creation system (Figure 2) is designed for the production of teaching materials aimed at students who will have access to them through different distribution channels. These may include DVDs, fixed devices, mobile devices, and social networks.

Figure 2

The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), initially formulated by Davis (1989), suggests that attitude towards the use of an ICT is based on two previous variables: perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use (Figure 4). According to Fishbein and Azjen (1975, p.216), attitude is "a learned predisposition to respond in a consistently favorable or unfavorable manner with respect to a given object." The perceived usefulness is considered a motivation that is extrinsic to the user and is defined as “the degree to which a person believes that using a particular system would enhance his or her job performance” (Davis, 1989, p.320), while perceived ease of use can be understood as the "degree to which a person believes that using a certain system will be effortless" (Davis, 1989, p.320).

Figure 4

As suggested by Yong et al. (2010), to determine if a technology will be used optimally, it is necessary to identify different external variables that may affect the usefulness and ease of use perceived by users of ICT. Various studies have identified and proposed such variables: type of user, gender, age, experience in technology management, level of training, career level, and personal tendency towards innovation (Hsiao & Yang, 2011; Kumar & Kumar, 2013; López-Bonilla & López-Bonilla, 2011; Teo & Noyes, 2011).

Different studies and meta-analyses in research have shown that TAM is a valid and robust model to explain the intention to use any technology and is notable for its simplicity (He & King, 2008; López-Bonilla & López-Bonilla, 2011). This has led to research on different technologies: portfolios (Wai-tsz et al., 2014), mobile devices (Kim et al., 2016), virtual libraries (Chen & Chengalur, 2015), e-learning (Cabero et al., 2016; Urquidi et al., 2019), m-learning (Iqbal & Ahmed, 2015), cloud computing (Jou & Wang, 2013), e-learning platforms (Alharbi & Drew, 2014), YouTube (Lee & Lehto, 2013), video games (Cheng et al., 2013; Huang, 2019), social networks (Lorenzo et al., 2011), and augmented reality (Martínez & Fernández, 2018).

Also important to bear in mind is the criticism raised in relation to the TAM: the instrument itself relies on the subject’s self-report, the results may be determined by context, the conceptual simplicity of the model, and the difficulty of obtaining objective measurements with the TAM (Yousafzai et al., 2007).

This research was carried out with faculty belonging to two universities in the Dominican Republic: Universidad Federico Henríquez y Carvajal (UFHEC) and Universidad Eugenio María de Hostos (UNIREMHOS). The diagnostic instruments were administered once the course "Pedagogical Bases of Virtual Training" was completed (25 contact hours and 25 virtual hours). The following content was developed: pedagogical bases for e-learning; content creation for network training; content production programs for the network; and virtual training activities, techniques and strategies.

Objectives. The main research objective was to analyze the degree of acceptance by teachers of Polimedia video systems. In addition, we intended to explore the significance of different sociodemographic variables in the model.

Sample. A total of 114 university professors - 64 women and 50 men - participated in this study. The majority were between 30 and 49 years old (73.7%). The distribution by branch of knowledge was as follows: 10.5% were in art and humanities, 18.4% sciences, 25.4% health sciences, 28.1% social and legal sciences, and 17.5% engineering and architecture. Figure 5 shows the percentages of participants by number of years of teaching experience.

Figure 5

As can be seen, most teachers have from 1 to 5 years of experience.

Study model, hypothesis, and instrument.Figure 6 represents the adaptation of the TAM formulated by Davis (1989) for this study.

Figure 6

This model is an adaptation of the one used by Cabero et al. (2016) in other work. It assumes that the teacher’s perception of ease of use of virtual training determines the perceived usefulness.

We considered five variables that could predict the interactions of the system: gender, age, teaching experience, experience in the use of ICT, and percentage of time spent on ICT in classes.

Consequently, the following hypotheses were formulated:

H1-H2-H3-H4-H5: There are significant differences between the contrast variable (gender, age, experience, ICT use time or use of ICT in class) and the perceived usefulness (PU) of the Polimedia system.

The instrument used was a questionnaire made up of two main sections: the first one collects information on the sociodemographic variables and the second assesses the degree of acceptance of the Polimedia system. Regarding the TAM, the instrument was made up of 17 items (Table 3) on a 7-point Likert scale:

1 = Extremely unlikely / disagree

The questionnaire was administered via the Internet with Google Forms and can be viewed at https://bit.ly/3bT0NyS

Before the production of the Polimedia materials, a double training procedure was followed. The first stage focused on how to make effective and attractive PowerPoint presentations. The second stage was to make contact with the Polimedia production room. For the first stage, all teachers were provided a document coordinated by Cabero (2018) called "The Incorporation of Polimedia Productions into University Education," a chapter of which is devoted to producing presentations. A face-to-face session was held with teachers at the same time to clear up questions and present important examples. For the second stage, visits were made with small groups of teachers to the recording room, where an explanation was given on the types of shots that would be used, and they were shown where the microphone was set and given recommendations on items of clothing to be worn or avoided on the day of the recording.

It should also be noted that, before the recordings were made, the presentations were reviewed by a member of the research team. Criteria were used to assess the quality of presentations and offer a series of recommendations if necessary.

In summary, the procedure followed in the experience included the following stages:

Teachers were trained to create presentations and were introduced to the Polimedia room and the way recordings are made.

To obtain the reliability index, Cronbach’s alpha was applied and the values obtained are presented in Table 1, both overall and for the different dimensions that make up the instrument.

Table 1

	Cronbach’s alpha
Total	.869
Perceived Usefulness (PU)	.792
Perceived Ease of Use (PEU)	.837
Perceived Enjoyment (PE)	.800
Attitude Towards Use (ATU)	.775
Intention to Use (IU)	.880

The values obtained indicate high levels of reliability according to O’Dwyer and Bernauer (2014). The item-total correlation was also examined, taking into account that the elimination of any item could increase the reliability of the instrument, both globally and in its different dimensions. The values obtained do not suggest the elimination of any item.

Data analysis procedure. The data matrix was modified for operational reasons. New variables were created: total, PU, PEU, PE, ATU, and IU. These variables were calculated from the arithmetic mean of the constituent items. In addition, the response order of item ATU2 “Students have been bored using Polimedia recordings” was reversed, as it was phrased negatively.

At the same time, it was verified that the data were not normally distributed through a descriptive analysis taking into account asymmetry and kurtosis. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test confirms this verification (Sig = .001).

On the other hand, to test the hypotheses, the Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis H test were used with a post-hoc test (Dunn’s test). Furthermore, to calculate the influence of the dimensions of the TAM, Spearman’s correlation coefficient was used.

The mean scores obtained in relation to the TAM instrument are presented below (Table 2).

Table 2

	M	SD
Total	5.92	0.68
Perceived Usefulness (PU)	6.20	0.74
Perceived Ease of Use (PEU)	5.79	1.05
Perceived Enjoyment (PE)	5.76	1.07
Attitude Towards Use (ATU)	5.46	0.81
Intention to Use (IU)	6.48	0.74

The mean evaluation scores obtained indicate that the teachers participating in the training action tended to value the different dimensions as “quite likely.” In other words, they tend to perceive the Polimedia system as easy to incorporate into university education and quite useful. At the same time, they show a receptive attitude toward using Polimedia. The low standard deviations obtained reveal a degree of uniformity in the teachers’ responses.

Table 3 shows the scores of the different items in the TAM diagnostic instrument part.

Table 3

Perceived Usefulness (PU)	M	SD
I believe that the use of this Polimedia system will improve my learning and student performance in this subject (PU1)	6.32	0.87
The use of the Polimedia system during classes would facilitate students’ understanding of certain concepts (PU2)	5.99	1.13
I think that the Polimedia system is useful for learning (PU3)	6.31	0.98
Using Polimedia recordings will increase student performance (PU4)	6.18	0.78
Perceived Ease of Use (PEU)	M	SD
I think the Polimedia system is easy to use (PEU1)	5.89	1.03
Learning to use the Polimedia system was not a problem for me (PEU2)	5.57	1.34
Learning to use the Polimedia system is clear and understandable (PEU3)	5.89	1.25
Perceived Enjoyment (PE)	M	SD
Using the Polimedia system is fun (PE1)	5.82	1.08
I enjoyed using the Polimedia system (PE2)	5.92	1.15
I think the Polimedia system makes it possible to learn by playing (PE3)	5.54	1.53
Attitude Towards Use (ATU)	M	SD
The use of a Polimedia system makes learning more interesting (ATU1)	6.31	0.83
Students have been bored using Polimedia recordings (ATU2)	4.21	1.84
I think using Polimedia recordings in the classroom is a good idea (ATU3)	6.27	0.84
Intention to Use (IU)	M	SD
I would like to continue using the Polimedia system in the future if I have the opportunity (IU1)	6.51	0.76
I would like to use the Polimedia system to learn a variety of topics (IU2)	6.46	0.81

The teachers emphasize that they would like to continue using the Polimedia system in the future, if they have the opportunity, and to use it to learn a variety of topics. The item with the lowest score should be interpreted in a negative sense, and therefore students can be considered not to have been bored using the Polimedia recordings.

Next, we performed an analysis of the hypotheses formulated above, derived from the TAM in Figure 6. First, we checked whether there was a positive influence between the dimensions of the TAM (H16-H17-H18-H19-H20-H21-H22-H23-H24). To do this, Spearman’s correlation coefficient was used. The obtained values are shown in Table 4.

Table 4

	PU	PEU	PE	ATU	IU
PU	1.000	.505**	.460**	.224*	.501**
PEU	.505**	1.000	.595**	.374**	.337**
PE	.460**	.595**	1.000	.469**	.566**
ATU	.224*	.374**	.469**	1.000	.236*
IU	.501**	.337**	.566**	.236*	1.000

Note: * = significant at 95%, ** = significant at 99%.

In all cases, there is a statistically positive relationship.

Finally, we present the data obtained regarding the variables relating to the possible influence of gender, age, experience, ICT use time, and ICT use in class (H1-H2-H3-H4-H5-H6-H7-H8-H9-H10-H11-H12-H13-H14-H15). For the gender variable, Mann-Whitney U tests were used (Table 5). In the rest of the cases, the Kruskal-Wallis H test was used (Table 6) with the post-hoc test for significant results (Table 7).

Table 5

	PU	PEU	PE
Mann-Whitney U	1313.000	1597.000	1509.000
Sig.	.098	.986	.600

Table 6

	UP	FUP	DP
Age	.001	.178	.003
Experience	.066	.279	.135
ICT experience	.000	.000	.014
ICT time use	.071	.000	.235

Table 7

Variable	Dimension	Group 1-2 contrast	Dunn	Sig.
Age	UP	60 or more - 25-29	48.375	.001
		30-39 - 25-29	45.075	.000
		40-49 - 25-29	38.693	.000
	DP	40-49 - 30-39	18.633	.009
		40-49 - 60 or more	-27.420	.029
		40-49 - 50-59	-37.966	.001
ICT experience	UP	10-14 - 6-9	38.813	.005
		10-14 - 20 or more	-59.812	.001
		10-14 -15-19	-68.812	.008
		Less than 1 - 1-3	-22.604	.015
		Less than 1 - 6-9	-37.647	.000
		Less than 1 - 20or more	-58.647	.000
		Less than 1 - 15-19	-67.647	.006
		4-5 - 20 or more	-41.700	.008
		4-5 - 15-19	-50.700	.039
		1-3 - 20 or more	-36.043	.011
	FUP	10-14 - 4-5	37.925	.008
		10-14 - 1-3	38.016	.002
		10-14 - 6-9	41.700	.002
		10-14 - 20 or more	-73.875	.000
		Less than 1 - 4-5	-25.388	.029
		Less than 1 - 1-3	-25.480	.006
		Less than 1 - 6-9	-29.163	.007
		Less than 1 - 20 or more	-61.338	.000
		15-19 - 20 or more	-61.250	.022
		4-5 - 20 or more	-35.950	.023
		1-3 - 20 or more	-35.859	.012
		6-9 - 20 or more	-32.175	.035
	DP	Less than 1 - 1-3	-19.116	.040
		Less than 1 - 20 or more	-57.485	.000
		15-19 - 20 or more	-55.250	.039
		10-14 - 20 or more	-52.187	.003
		1-3 - 20 or more	-38.370	.007
		6-9 - 20 or more	-36.950	.015
ICT time use	FUP	26-50% - 51-75%	-30.487	.000
		26-50% - 11-25%	36.114	.001
		26-50% - 76-100%	-43.322	.000
		0-10% - 51-75%	-26.684	.015
		0-10% - 11-25%	-32.311	.018
		0-10% - 76-100%	-39.519	.004

There are no statistically significant differences regarding gender. Therefore, H1, H6, and H11 are rejected.

The results allow us to accept H2, H12, H4, H9, H14, and H10. The rest of the hypotheses are rejected: H7, H3, H8, and H15.

In Table 7, each row tests the hypothesis between groups within the same variable. The post-hoc test results are displayed only when statistically significant.

The conclusions drawn from this work point in two directions: one conceptual and scientific, and the other methodological and operational.

Regarding the first of these directions, the study addressed a number of aspects. First, our research examined the validity and consistency of the TAM model formulated by Davis (1989). Secondly, we assessed its significance in determining the future degree of acceptance of the Polimedia system by teachers. In turn, this determines the relevance of virtual training in an educational institution that, in this case, provides higher education. These results are consistent with those obtained by other authors regarding teachers’ acceptance of virtual training (Cabero et al., 2016; Teo & Noyes, 2011).

As future lines of research, we propose replicating this study in another context with other teachers. This would confirm if the significant results we found are maintained. Another avenue to explore is the degree of acceptance by students when these materials are used in teaching. The hypothesis is that the results for students would also be positive. Indeed, research has been conducted with students on videoblogs and the results point in the same direction (Colomo et al., 2020).

Regarding the second direction, the work provides technology with an organizational structure that can be of great help in facilitating the incorporation of ICT in university teaching-learning processes. As different research has shown, the quality of the infrastructure and availability of digital devices and necessary technologies is a variable that hinders the incorporation of ICT by teachers (Cela-Ranilla et al., 2017; Gil-Flores et al., 2017), as does the lack of time available for teachers to invest in the production of technologies (Hilliger et al., 2020). In addition, the ease with which this technology is produced affects the degree of technological acceptance shown by the teachers involved in the study. Its incorporation can serve to eliminate the resistance to change that teachers feel toward the incorporation of ICT in teaching (Córica, 2020; Córica & García, 2018; Mercader, 2019).

On the other hand, the work indicates the viability of establishing educational training activities for teachers in Polimedia systems. According to related research in a Dominican context, the level of digital competence is high in a technological-instrumental dimension and low in educational use (Cabero et al., 2020; Pérez-Díaz, 2019). These activities should focus not so much on the instrumental component - that is, the operation of the video recording and assembly system - but rather on didactic aspects, those related to the design of materials for the network or the strategies and e-activities that can be applied within the network. This suggests different orientations are necessary for institutions wishing to employ this form of virtual learning, because - among other reasons - this will allow them to adopt and modify significant attitudes towards virtual education.

It has also been pointed out that Polimedia recordings can be very useful for teachers in the application of the flipped learning methodology (Bergmann & Sams, 2014). At the same time, these recordings can be turned into interactive videos that incorporate questions about the information presented, where a positive response is required from the students in order to continue viewing the document. This results in active engagement by the student and the investment of more mental effort. These questions can be incorporated with a variety of programs, such as H5P or Camtasia. This topic also opens up a possible future line of research.

Finally, this study provides instruments that are easy to administer and exhibit acceptable levels of reliability. For this reason, the relevance of this study lies in gaining insight into the degree of acceptance of technology in virtual training by teachers.