Evaluating the Effectiveness of an MS Project Webinar in Enhancing Construction Students’ Digital Scheduling Awareness, Perceived Usefulness, and Future Industry Readiness

This study examines how an MS Project webinar helped final-year students improve their awareness of digital scheduling and understand its relevance to future construction practice. With digital project management becoming increasingly important in construction education, the study focused on students’ scheduling awareness, the challenges they faced in learning or applying MS Project, and their views on the effectiveness of the webinar. A quantitative cross-sectional survey was conducted with 69 usable responses from 106 final-year students involved in an Infrastructure Design Project-related learning setting. The data were analysed using SmartPLS through measurement and structural model assessments. The results showed strong reliability, internal consistency, and convergent validity in the measurement model, although some HTMT values indicated that scheduling awareness, perceived usefulness, and future industry demand were closely related. In the structural model, project scheduling awareness and the effectiveness of the webinar had a significant effect on students’ perceived usefulness of MS Project. However, learning and implementation challenges did not have a significant influence. The strongest finding was that students who found MS Project useful were also more likely to believe that digital scheduling skills would be important in the construction industry. At the same time, perceived usefulness did not significantly affect the overall webinar rating, suggesting that students’ satisfaction may also depend on factors such as delivery style, interaction, and engagement. Overall, the findings suggest that webinar-based technical exposure can help build digital construction readiness, but stronger competence requires hands-on practice, guided software activities, and closer integration with project-based learning.

MS Project; Construction Management Education; Digital Scheduling Awareness; Perceived Usefulness

1. Al-Adwan, A. S., Li, N., Al-Adwan, A., Abbasi, G. A., Albelbisi, N. A., & Habibi, A. (2023). “Extending the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to Predict University Students’ Intentions to Use Metaverse-Based Learning Platforms”. Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 15381–15413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11816-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Al-Dhamad, S. H. R., Kurwi, S. I. B., Varouqa, I. F., Hayder, G., Obaid, A. H., & Al-Zwainy, F. M. S. (2025). Optimizing Project Management: Planning, Scheduling, and Cost Estimation Using Microsoft Project. Journal of Applied Science, Engineering, Technology, and Education, 7(2), 349–356. https://doi.org/10.35877/454RI.asci4165 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alshammari, S. H., & Alkhwaldi, A. F. (2025). An integrated approach using social support theory and technology acceptance model to investigate the sustainable use of digital learning technologies. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-83450-z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Andersson, T., Ribeirinho, M. J., Blanco, J. L., Mischke, J., Rockhill, D., Sjödin, E., Strube, G., & Palter, R. (2020). The next normal in construction. Mckinsey & Company, June. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/the-next-normal-in-construction-how-disruption-is-reshaping-the-worlds-largest-ecosystem [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Barz, N., Benick, M., Dörrenbächer-Ulrich, L., & Perels, F. (2024). Students’ acceptance of e-learning: extending the technology acceptance model with self-regulated learning and affinity for technology. Discover Education, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00195-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. CIDB. (2020). Construction 4.0 Strategic Plan (2021-2025) Next Revolution of the Malaysian Construction Industry. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Demir, S., & Usak, M. (2025). Analyzing the Implementation of PLS-SEM in Educational Technology Research: A Review of the Past 10 Years. SAGE Open. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Forum, W. E. (2025). Future of Jobs Report 2025. In World Economic Forum (Issue January). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-40325-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Jiang, S., Li, H., & Gan, D. (2025). Technology acceptance model for online education: identifying interdisciplinary topics and their evolution based on BERTopic model. Social Sciences and Humanities Open, 12(July), 101831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101831 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Joseph F. Hair, J., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM)-Third Edition. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Kemp, A., Palmer, E., Strelan, P., & Thompson, H. (2024). Testing a novel extended educational technology acceptance model using student attitudes towards virtual classrooms. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(5), 2110–2131. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13440 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2018). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: The inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods. Information Systems Journal, 28(1), 227–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12131 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Mischke, J., Stokvis, K., Vermeltfoort, K., & Biemans, B. (2024). Delivering on construction productivity is no longer optional. Why the construction industry must climb out of its productivity rut—and why it hasn’t yet. McKinsey & Company, August. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/our-insights/delivering-on-construction-productivity-is-no-longer-optional [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Obi, L. I., Osuizugbo, I. C., & Awuzie, B. O. (2025). Closing the artificial intelligence skills gap in construction: competency insights from a systematic review. Results in Engineering, 27(June), 106406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2025.106406 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Ortiz‑López, A., Sánchez‑Prieto, J. C., & Olmos‑Migueláñez, S. (2024). Perceived usefulness of mobile devices in assessment: a comparative study of three technology acceptance models using PLS‑SEM. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 13, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44322-023-00001-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling ( PLS-SEM ) Using R. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Sinkovics, N., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2023). A perspective on using partial least squares structural equation modelling in data articles. Data in Brief, 48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2023.109074 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Said, S. A. A. S., & Yussof, F. N. M. (2023). Experiential learning of using digital tools in construction management education. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2881(1). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0167862 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Sasongko, A. T., Ekhsan, M., & Fatchan, M. (2025). Dataset on technology acceptance in E-learning: A PLS-SEM analysis using extended TAM among undergraduate students in Indonesia. Telematics and Informatics Reports, 18(December 2024), 100192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teler.2025.100192 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Siddiqui, F. H., Thaheem, M. J., & Abdekhodaee, A. (2023). A Review of the Digital Skills Needed in the Construction Industry: Towards a Taxonomy of Skills. Buildings, 13(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13112711 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Syari’Ati Fathimah, N., Fiqriansyah, F., Rahman, E. F., & Piantari, E. (2024). Students’ Intention To Accept Gamification on Web-Based Interactive Multimedia Using an Active Knowledge-Sharing Learning Model. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 19(3), 957–965. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Wu, X., Wider, W., Wong, L. S., Chan, C. K., & Maidin, S. S. (2023). Integrating the technology acceptance model on online learning effectiveness of emerging adult learners in Guangzhou, China. International Journal of Education and Practice, 11(2), 129–140. https://doi.org/10.18488/61.v11i2.3282 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Room Safety Monitoring Using a Temperature Sensor Alarm System
• Motion Activated Automatic Garage Door System
• Instrumentation & Control of Green Hydrogen Production Plant