International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE)

Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023, pp. 555~562

ISSN: 2252-8822, DOI: 10.11591/ijere.v12i2.24237  555

Predicting teachers’ use of digital technology

Siti Syuhada Abu Hanifah1, Norliza Ghazali1, Ahmad Fauzi Mohd Ayub1, Rosfuzah Roslan2
1
Faculty of Education Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia
2
Faculty of Information Technology, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Batu Pahat, Malaysia

Article Info ABSTRACT

Article history: In recent years, the use of digital technology and its relationship to the
ability known as digital competence has become a core concept in
Received Mar 26, 2022 discussions about the skills that individuals should possess in a knowledge
Revised Dec 27, 2022 society. Teachers’ skills in using digital technology are becoming a critical
Accepted Jan 30, 2023 component of developing practical pedagogical knowledge for practice and
student learning enhancement. The purpose of this study is to predict the
factors that influence secondary school teachers when it comes to using
Keywords: digital technology. This study will establish relationships between personal
innovativeness, technology self-efficacy, attitude toward digital technology,
Attitude and digital competence. In Pahang, Malaysia, a survey was conducted with
Digital competence 493 secondary school teachers from 50 public secondary schools of 11
Digital technology districts. Proportionate stratified sampling, cluster random sampling, and
Personal innovativeness simple random sampling were used to obtain samples. The findings have
Technology self-efficacy established that technology self-efficacy, attitude towards digital technology,
and digital competence significantly affect how teachers use digital
technology. These findings emphasize the importance of increasing teachers’
digital competence as well as numerous elements that influence teachers’ use
of digital technology to fulfill the expectations of future qualified
professions and thus prepare students for their future.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.

Corresponding Author:
Siti Syuhada Abu Hanifah
Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia
43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
Email: [email protected]

1. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, experts from all around the world have become intrigued by the term “digital
technology”. Digital technology is defined as a group of electronic technologies that includes hardware and
software utilized in formal and informal settings by individuals for educational, social, and/or entertainment
purposes, such as: i) Desktop computers; ii) Mobile devices; iii) Digital recording devices; iv) Data logging
equipment and accompanying devices; v) Interactive whiteboards; vi) Web 2.0 technologies and other online
resources; and vii) A variety of commercially available offline-capable instructional software packages.
Digital technology has risen in prominence and is now ingrained in our daily lives, workplaces, and
societies [1]. It is widely utilized for several purposes, including health [2], communication [3], business [4],
agriculture [5], and education [6].
As a versatile medium, digital technology is used extensively in education field to improve teaching
and learning in schools and higher education institutions. It has been proven that when digital technologies
were utilized in the classroom, students were more motivated to participate in activities that were not only
productive but also active and passive than when no technology were used in the classroom. In addition,
students who took part in active, productive, and interactive activities had better learning outcomes [7].

Journal homepage: http://ijere.iaescore.com

556  ISSN: 2252-8822

Meanwhile, teachers found that digital technology improved their teaching, gave them additional tools to
employ, facilitated better planning, and resulted in easier to assess their students and more personalized
teaching [8], [9].
However, the Malaysian teachers’ inadequacy access to digital technology was reported in several
studies. Ebrahimi and Yeo [10] revealed that digital technologies are exclusively used for education only by
57% of teachers in Johor, Malaysia. While Abdullah et al. [11] found the usage of digital technology in
Malaysia among mathematics teachers remains low in comparison to South Korean teachers. These studies
reveal that the use of digital technology among teachers in Malaysia is still not noticeable despite several
initiatives across Malaysia have been executed. Teachers’ inadequacy access to digital technology not only
happened in Malaysia, but similar situations were also discovered all around the world [12]. In addition,
information and communication technology (ICT) facility or infrastructure sufficiency that can be accessed
by the teachers in also becomes an issue in Malaysia. A study [13] found out that poor internet connection
and facilities such as computer were few of challenge that influence teachers to use ICT. Another study [14]
also uncovered the same result where inadequate schools’ ICT tools still was among the challenges faced by
the teachers. And this factor gives impact to the teacher’s use of ICT in teaching and learning. Teachers also
claimed that lack of school management and colleagues’ support were the main barrier for them to use ICTs
in teaching [12]. A study also revealed that 68% of participated teachers agree that inappropriate
management support is one of the reasons for them not to use technology in class [15]. In another study, the
evidence showed that school principals played an important role in driving teachers to use ICT in the
classroom [16].
Studies have discovered that various factors can influence people to use digital technology. Personal
innovativeness can be viewed as one of the variables since it increases employees’ creativity in interacting
with digital technologies in the organization [17]. Employees with higher levels of personal innovation are
more likely to accept workplace-related technological components and activities [18]. From an educational
standpoint, teachers play an important role in the development of innovation and innovativeness in society
[19]. They are also the first to introduce and promote ideas to society [20]. Moreover, this can be
accomplished when a society has highly innovative teachers on a personal level. This is because progressive
educators recognize the potential of technology for their job and believe that utilizing technology will be
straightforward [21], [22]. While Ertmer and Ottenbreit-Lefwich [23] stated that technology self-efficacy
could impact teachers’ digital technology use. This is because it is not enough for teacher to employ
technology in the classroom, but teachers must also feel secure utilizing it. Teachers are more inclined to
employ technology when they feel confident and capable of doing so [24]. Thurm and Barzel discovered that
teachers who have poor confidence in using technology in education also have a low frequency of technology
use [25]. Previous research has also found an association between technology self-efficacy and the use of
digital technology [26], [27].
Furthermore, numerous studies have established a substantial correlation between teachers’ attitudes
and the use of technology in education, suggesting that the more teachers perceive technology to be useful,
the more likely they are to develop and implement technology in the classroom. Several studies discovered
that attitude had a positive and significant effect on the use of digital technology [28]–[30]. This emphasizes
the importance of attitude in predicting teachers’ use of technology in the classroom. Admiraal et al.
discovered that attitudes appeared to be the only explanatory variable for teacher educators’ usage of
hardware facilities [31]. Similarly, Kreijns et al. [32] discovered that the teacher’s attitude toward adopting
digital learning materials was substantially explained. According to a research, teachers who are willing to
experiment with technology are more likely to utilize it to support student-centered teaching practices [33].
Recently, Cattaneo et al. [34] confirmed the positive and significant effect between attitude towards
technology, digital tool use frequency, and digital competence.
Another factor that can be considered is digital competence. According to Yazon et al. [35], there is
a significant and robust relationship between faculty members’ digital literacy, digital competence, and
research output. That is, an improvement in faculty members’ ability to conduct, complete, present, and
publish a research paper is positively associated with an increase in comprehending, discovering, using, and
creating knowledge using digital technology. Higher digital competence has also been linked to the usage of
digital tools [36]–[38]. Teachers who used digital tools in their classrooms were frequently more digitally
competent, based on the notion that competence grows with practice [39]. Not only that, Cattaneo et al. [34]
also have shown that a positive attitude toward technology, how often people use digital tools, and their
digital competence are linked. This study aimed to explore the influence of personal innovativeness,
technology self-efficacy, attitudes towards digital technology and digital competence to digital technology
utilization among secondary school teachers in Pahang, Malaysia.

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 555-562
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  557

2. RESEARCH METHOD
Correlational research is chosen as the research design conducted in this study. According to
Fraenkel, Wallen, and Hyun [40], the correlational design is appropriate to the context of the study that
evaluates the relationship between two or more variables in a group. The population in this study consists of
public secondary school teachers who teach in day secondary schools in 11 districts in Pahang, Malaysia. The
study population is teachers who teach form one to form five students, which is 9138 teachers. The sample
calculation using Cochran’s [41] formula for this study is 493. Proportionate stratified sampling, cluster
random sampling, and simple random sampling were used to obtain samples.
The questionnaire of this study consists of 87 items, which includes eight items in Section A and 79
items in Section B. Section A consists of items on respondents’ demographic background. Meanwhile,
section B will consist of items related to the four independent variables (personal innovativeness, technology
self-efficacy, attitudes toward digital technology, and digital competence) and the dependent variable (use of
digital technology).
As the dependent variable of the study, the use of digital technology will assess the degree to which
teachers integrate technological tools and resources to improve their teaching. This construct consists of 11
items adapted from previous studies [36], [42], [43]. The first independent variable, personal innovativeness,
will assess the degree to which teachers believe that accepting digital technology will improve their teaching
performance and use it-all 14 items adapted from PIIT scale [44]. The construct of technology self-efficacy
(16 items) will measure teachers’ belief in their capability to use digital technology. Technology self-efficacy
items were adapted from TPSA C-21 Scale [45]. Attitudes towards digital technology aim at assessing the
teachers’ driving force behind their digital technology use behavior. This construct consists of 16 items
adapted from teacher bit attitude scale [46]. The final variable, digital competence, refers to teachers’ ability
to use digital technology confidently, critically, and creatively to convey the content of the lesson to the
students. This study measures digital competence using DigCompEdu scales [39], consisting of 22 items.
In the pilot study/test, 36 teachers from secondary schools in the same state participated. Table 1
shows the Cronbach’s alpha value results obtained in this study for the pilot and actual study. The reliability
values vary between 0.823 to 0.962. The survey is considered an acceptable instrument due to its consistency,
as all values are more than 0.7 [47].

Table 1. Reliability of the constructs

Construct α: Pilot study (n=36) α: Actual study (n=493)
Personal innovativeness 0.962 0.960
Technology self-efficacy 0.961 0.948
Attitude towards digital technology 0.841 0.858
Digital competence 0.918 0.932
Use of digital technology 0.895 0.883

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 2 shows the descriptive analysis for all variables studied. The mean for all variables studied is
high. The highest mean of personal innovativeness is 4.04 (SD=0.609), implying that teachers believed
integrating technology into their teaching and learning will improve their teaching performance. The
respondents also have a firm belief in their capability to use digital technology in their teaching and learning
(Mean=3.91, SD=0.631). Respondents also positively adapt information and communication technology
(ICT) into teaching and learning (Mean=3.71, SD=0.529). However, respondents’ digital competence is 3.05
(SD=0.627) which is slightly high. This indicated that respondents have acceptable digital competence that
would help them use it in teaching and learning. The overall mean for the use of digital technology is 3.33
(SD=0.580). This indicates that respondents use digital technology either during their teaching and learning
or activity related to academic tasks.

Table 2. Mean and standard deviation variables studied

Mean Standard deviation
Personal innovativeness 4.04 0.609
Technology self-efficacy 3.91 0.631
Attitudes towards digital technology 3.71 0.529
Digital competence 3.05 0.627
Use of digital technology 3.33 0.580

Predicting teachers’ use of digital technology (Siti Syuhada Abu Hanifah)

558  ISSN: 2252-8822

The next analysis determines the relationships between the four factors with use of digital
technology among secondary school teachers as presented in Table 3. There was a positive correlation
between technology self-efficacy (r=0.575; p<0.001), digital competence (r=0.560; p<0.001), attitudes
towards ICT (r=0.488, p<0.001) and personal innovativeness (r=0.476; p<0.001) with teachers’ use of digital
technology. Correlation coefficients (absolute values) that are between 0.20 to 0.35 reflects low correlations,
0.35 to 0.65 is modest or moderate correlations, 0.65 to 0.85 is high correlations, and r coefficients more than
0.85 are considered as very high correlations [48]. As can be seen from Table 3, the teachers’ technology
self-efficacy, digital competence, attitudes towards digital technology and personal innovativeness are
moderately correlated to teachers’ use of digital.

Table 3. Correlation coefficients between teachers’ personal innovativeness, technology self-efficacy,

attitudes towards digital technology, digital competence, and use of digital technology
Personal Technology Attitudes towards Digital
innovativeness self-efficacy digital technology competence
Use of digital technology 0.476. 0.575 0.488 0.560

3.1. Regression
A regression analysis was also performed to assess the research objective and discover the various
variables influencing teachers’ use of digital technology. Table 4 reveals that the multiple correlation
coefficients were 0.436, suggesting that teachers’ personal innovativeness, technology self-efficacy, attitudes
toward digital technology, and digital competence accounted for approximately 43.6% of the variation in the
use of digital technology. According to Table 5, there was a statistically significant relationship between the
variables under consideration and the outcome (F (4,492) =94.187, p=0.001). It became clear from this that
any one of the mentioned factors might be a substantial predictor of the degree to which teachers make use of
digital technology.

Table 4. Model summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square
1 0.660 0.436 0.436
Predictors: (Constant), Personal_innovativeness, Technology_selfefficacy,
Attitude_toward _digital_technology, Digital_competence

Table 5. ANOVA
Model Sum of squares df Mean square F Sig
Regression 72.01 4 18.002 94.187 0.000
Residual 93.274 488 0.191
Total 165.284 492

The findings of the multiple regression analysis as shown in Table 6, suggested that technology self-
efficacy, attitudes toward digital technology, and digital competence influenced secondary school teachers’
use of digital technology. Beta values (β) were used to determine the relative importance of the three
predictors of teachers’ use of digital technology, and the results show that technology self-efficacy
(β=0.262), attitude toward digital technology (β=0.141), and digital competence (β=0.329) were in that order.
In other words, digital competence contributed 32.9% of the variance, technology self-efficacy explained
26.2%, and attitude towards digital technology explained 14.1% of the variance teachers’ use of digital
technology.

Table 6. Model coefficients

Unstandardized coefficients Standardized coefficients
Model t Sig.
B Standard error Beta
(Constant) 0.627 0.153 4.092 0.000
Personal innovativeness 0.064 0.05 0.067 1.269 0.205
Technology self-efficacy 0.241 0.049 0.262 4.888 0.000
Attitude towards digital technology 0.154 0.052 0.141 2.961 0.003
Digital competence 0.304 0.038 0.329 8.013 0.000

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 555-562
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  559

3.1.1. Dependent variable: use of digital technology

This study examined five variables: personal innovativeness, technology self-efficacy, attitude
towards digital technology, and digital competence, which are the predictive factors for the use of digital
technology among secondary school teachers. Despite the higher mean compared to other variables, personal
innovativeness was insignificant to teachers’ use of digital technology. Naturally, according to Gupta,
Bhardwaj, and Singh, people with higher levels of personal innovativeness are likely to accept workplace-
related technological components and activities [18]. However, in this case, teachers probably already have
the traits where they believe that using technology would improve their performance in teaching. Given that,
at some point, they have already passed the phase where they need to improve their belief in using
technology. Either the teachers have high or low belief in using digital technology, it does not affect or
encourage them to use the digital technology. Hence, personal innovativeness can be excluded as a factor that
predicts the use of digital technology among teachers.
On the other hand, it was discovered that teachers’ technology self-efficacy was significantly related
to their usage of digital technology. In a similar manner, previous researches that were conducted and
published in the past have shown a relationship between technology self-efficacy and the use of digital
technology [26], [27]. This study demonstrated that the variable explained 26.2% of digital technology
utilization among teachers. Ghomi and Redecker [39] also obtained quite a similar result, where the effect
size is 24%. According to several studies, feeling confident and secure is important to make a teacher to use
technology [23]–[25], [49]. One of the reasons for having confidence and security, or technology self-
efficacy, is the availability of digital technology knowledge. Taimalu and Luik [50] highlighted that
technology integration was directly influenced by knowledge of technology and its integration. The daily
routine of a teacher may demand that they use digital technology as simple as a smartphone to get the job
done. This kind of knowledge makes them more confident in using digital technology. Another reason that
can be considered is the school culture. With the encouragement and technical assistance from the school
management, teachers felt confident and safe using digital technology and learning new technology in
creating their teaching materials.
In addition, attitude towards digital technology was found to influence teachers’ use of digital
technology positively. Attitude towards digital technology explains that 14.1% of teachers’ use of digital
technology. When teachers have a positive attitude towards digital technology, the teachers will have more
interest and motivation to keep using digital technology, whether in teaching or in facilitating them to prepare
their lesson plan in learning process. Teachers also feel enthusiastic about utilizing digital technology
because they believed it inspired their students and ease the assessment process. This finding is consistent
with previous studies’ results which showed that teachers have positive attitudes towards digital technology
and its utilization [29], [51]–[53].
Finally, it was established that digital competence is significant for a teacher’s use of digital
technology, contributing to 32.9% of the variance. This figure, according to Cohen [48], indicates medium
strength. This is most likely due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which require teachers to use various digital
technology to teach. Throughout this quarantine period, teachers received extensive in-house training,
including webinars and online workshops, to aid them in implementing digital technologies. Teachers who
engage in webinars and online workshops are also awarded certificates to encourage them to improve their
digital competence level actively. Similarly, the Ministry of Education provides an update of the Digital
Educational Learning Initiative Malaysia (DELIMa) Portal to keep up with the demands of teaching and
learning. It is prepared to support teachers and students. The portal involves several apps, training modules,
and materials that align with the current curriculum. Furthermore, we noticed that teachers’ digital
competence has increased due to their exposure to digital technology. Digital competence not only predicts
the use of digital technology, but the exact relationship can be reversed. As documented by Ghomi and
Redecker [39], since the curriculum requires science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
teachers to use digital technology more frequently, this group of teachers has a higher level of digital
competence than non-STEM teachers.

4. CONCLUSION
Given the findings acquired within this scope, it was determined that digital competence is the most
significant predictor of digital technology utilization among secondary school teachers. A citizen needs to
have the knowledge, skills, and attitude to use technology in five different domains-information management,
communication, media production, design, design and design-as well as the ability to create content. This
reaffirms the importance of teachers having a high level of digital competence, which not only enables
teachers to use digital technology more effectively, but also enables teachers to educate students toward
becoming digitally competent citizens. For that reason, Malaysian Ministry of Education has implemented a
variety of training programs for teachers. However, the training is deemed insufficient to assist teachers in
Predicting teachers’ use of digital technology (Siti Syuhada Abu Hanifah)
560  ISSN: 2252-8822

effectively using technology. Therefore, future training should be structured to incorporate new technical
knowledge more efficiently. This is essential so that the training may help teachers increase not just their
digital competence but also their confidence, willingness to explore, and attitude toward the use of digital
technology. The given training should also be easy to comprehend for teachers of all levels, so as to
encourage them to adopt digital technology as one of the tools to improve their teaching effectiveness.

REFERENCES
[1] W. Ng, New Digital Technology in Education. Switzerland: Springer, 2015.
[2] L. Andreu-Pejó, V. Martínez-Borba, C. Suso-Ribera, and J. Osma, “Can we predict the evolution of depressive symptoms,
adjustment, and perceived social support of pregnant women from their personality characteristics? A technology-supported
longitudinal study,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 17, no. 10, p. 3439, May 2020, doi:
10.3390/ijerph17103439.
[3] A. Mulyana, R. Briandana, and E. Rekarti, “ICT and social media as a marketing communication platform in facilitating social
engagement in the digital era,” International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 1–16, 2020,
[Online]. Available: https://www.ijicc.net/images/vol_13/Iss_5/13501_Mulyana_2020_E_R.pdf.
[4] L. T. Ha, “Are digital business and digital public services a driver for better energy security? Evidence from a European sample,”
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, vol. 29, no. 18, pp. 27232–27256, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-17843-2.
[5] P. Radoglou-Grammatikis, P. Sarigiannidis, T. Lagkas, and I. Moscholios, “A compilation of UAV applications for precision
agriculture,” Computer Networks, vol. 172, p. 107148, May 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.comnet.2020.107148.
[6] F. Saadati, R. A. Tarmizi, and A. F. M. Ayub, “Utilization of information and communication technologies in mathematics
learning,” Journal on Mathematics Education, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 138–147, 2014, doi: 10.22342/jme.5.2.1498.138-147.
[7] C. Wekerle, M. Daumiller, and I. Kollar, “Using digital technology to promote higher education learning: The importance of
different learning activities and their relations to learning outcomes,” Journal of Research on Technology in Education, vol. 54,
no. 1, pp. 1–17, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1080/15391523.2020.1799455.
[8] J. Sargent and A. Casey, “Flipped learning, pedagogy and digital technology: Establishing consistent practice to optimise lesson
time,” European Physical Education Review, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 70–84, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1177/1356336X19826603.
[9] S. Walan, “Embracing digital technology in science classrooms-secondary school teachers’ enacted teaching and reflections on
practice,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 431–441, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10956-020-09828-6.
[10] S. S. Ebrahimi and Y. K. Jiar, “The use of technology at Malaysian Public High Schools,” Merit Research Journals, vol. 6, no. 3,
pp. 54–60, 2018, [Online]. Available: https://meritresearchjournals.org/er/content/2018/March/Ebrahimi%20and%20Jiar.pdf.
[11] A. H. Abdullah, B. Shin, N. F. Jumaat, U. H. A. Kohar, Z. M. Ashari, and S. N. S. A. Rahman, “Mirror-mirror on the wall, which
teachers Use educational technology in mathematics Classroom-Malaysians or South Koreans?” in TALE 2019 - 2019 IEEE
International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Education, Dec. 2019, pp. 1–8, doi:
10.1109/TALE48000.2019.9225917.
[12] L. Mynaříková and L. Novotnỳ, “Knowledge society failure? Barriers in the use of ICTs and further teacher education in the
Czech Republic,” Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 12, no. 17, p. 6933, 2020, doi: 10.3390/SU12176933.
[13] M. L. Cheok, S. L. Wong, A. F. Ayub, and R. Mahmud, “Teachers’ perceptions of e-learning in Malaysian secondary schools,”
Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 878–885, 2014, [Online]. Available:
http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/63390.
[14] N. A. Razak, H. A. Jalil, and I. A. Ismail, “Challenges in ICT integration among Malaysian public primary education teachers:
The roles of leaders and stakeholders,” International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, vol. 14, no. 24, pp. 184–
205, Dec. 2019, doi: 10.3991/ijet.v14i24.12101.
[15] O. A. Ojo and E. O. Adu, “The effectiveness of information and communication technologies (ICTs) in teaching and learning in
high schools in eastern cape province,” South African Journal of Education, vol. 38, no. Supplement 2, pp. 1–11, Dec. 2018, doi:
10.15700/saje.v38ns2a1483.
[16] Z. Baharuldin, S. Jamaluddin, and M. S. N. Shaharom, “The role of school administrative support and primary school teachers’
ICT literacy to integrate ICT into the classrooms in Pahang, Malaysia,” International Online Journal of Educational Leadership,
vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 26–42, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.22452/iojel.vol3no1.3.
[17] P. Korzynski, J. Paniagua, and E. Rodriguez-Montemayor, “Employee creativity in a digital era: the mediating role of social
media,” Management Decision, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 1100–1117, May 2020, doi: 10.1108/MD-05-2018-0586.
[18] R. Gupta, G. Bhardwaj, and G. Singh, “Employee perception and behavioral intention to adopt BYOD in the organizations,” in
2019 International Conference on Automation, Computational and Technology Management, ICACTM 2019, Apr. 2019, pp. 73–
78, doi: 10.1109/ICACTM.2019.8776815.
[19] F. Akgün, “Investigation of instructional technology acceptance and individual innovativeness of academicians,” Turkish Online
Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, pp. 291–322, Jul. 2017, doi: 10.17569/tojqi.292135.
[20] D. G. Erdoğan and D. Z. Güneş, “The relationship between individual Innovatiness and change readiness conditions of students
attending faculty of education,” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 106, pp. 3033–3040, Dec. 2013, doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.349.
[21] H. Ghadirian, A. F. M. Ayub, A. D. Silong, K. B. A. Bakar, and A. M. H. Zadeh, “Knowledge sharing behaviour among students
in learning environments: A review of literature,” Asian Social Science, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 38–45, Jan. 2014, doi:
10.5539/ass.v10n4p38.
[22] S. G. Mazman Akar, “Does it matter being innovative: Teachers’ technology acceptance,” Education and Information
Technologies, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 3415–3432, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1007/s10639-019-09933-z.
[23] P. A. Ertmer and A. T. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, “Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture
intersect,” Journal of Research on Technology in Education, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 255–284, Mar. 2010, doi:
10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551.
[24] J. Wang, D. E. H. Tigelaar, and W. Admiraal, “Connecting rural schools to quality education: Rural teachers’ use of digital
educational resources,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 101, pp. 68–76, Dec. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.009.
[25] D. Thurm and B. Barzel, “Effects of a professional development program for teaching mathematics with technology on teachers’
beliefs, self-efficacy and practices,” ZDM - Mathematics Education, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 1411–1422, Dec. 2020, doi:
10.1007/s11858-020-01158-6.

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 555-562
Int J Eval & Res Educ ISSN: 2252-8822  561

[26] Y. Lee and J. Lee, “Enhancing pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs for technology integration through lesson planning
practice,” Computers and Education, vol. 73, pp. 121–128, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.001.
[27] A. Rohatgi, R. Scherer, and O. E. Hatlevik, “The role of ICT self-efficacy for students’ ICT use and their achievement in a
computer and information literacy test,” Computers and Education, vol. 102, pp. 103–116, Nov. 2016, doi:
10.1016/j.compedu.2016.08.001.
[28] G. Baş, M. Kubiatko, and A. M. Sünbül, “Teachers’ perceptions towards ICTs in teaching-learning process: Scale validity and
reliability study,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 61, pp. 176–185, Aug. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.022.
[29] D. Farjon, A. Smits, and J. Voogt, “Technology integration of pre-service teachers explained by attitudes and beliefs,
competency, access, and experience,” Computers and Education, vol. 130, pp. 81–93, Mar. 2019, doi:
10.1016/j.compedu.2018.11.010.
[30] A. B. Mirete, J. J. Maquilón, L. Mirete, and R. A. Rodríguez, “Digital competence and university teachers’ conceptions about
teaching. A structural causal model,” Sustainability (Switzerland), vol. 12, no. 12, p. 4842, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.3390/SU12124842.
[31] W. Admiraal, D. Lockhorst, B. Smit, and S. Weijers, “The integrative model of behavior prediction to explain technology Use in
post-graduate teacher education programs in the Netherlands,” International Journal of Higher Education, vol. 2, no. 4, Nov.
2013, doi: 10.5430/ijhe.v2n4p172.
[32] K. Kreijns, F. Van Acker, M. Vermeulen, and H. Van Buuren, “What stimulates teachers to integrate ICT in their pedagogical
practices? the use of digital learning materials in education,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 217–225, Jan.
2013, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.08.008.
[33] Y. Li, V. Popov, V. Garza, and A. Keicher, “Exploring predictors of secondary school teachers’ use of technology to support
student-centered teaching,” 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS), vol. 1, 2018, pp. 160–167, [Online].
Available: https://repository.isls.org//handle/1/508.
[34] A. A. P. Cattaneo, C. Antonietti, and M. Rauseo, “How digitalised are vocational teachers? Assessing digital competence in
vocational education and looking at its underlying factors,” Computers and Education, vol. 176, p. 104358, Jan. 2022, doi:
10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104358.
[35] A. D. Yazon, K. Ang-Manaig, C. A. C. Buama, and J. F. B. Tesoro, “Digital literacy, digital competence and research
productivity of educators,” Universal Journal of Educational Research, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 1734–1743, Aug. 2019, doi:
10.13189/ujer.2019.070812.
[36] O. E. Hatlevik, “Examining the relationship between teachers’ Self-efficacy, their digital competence, Strategies to evaluate
information, and use of ICT at School,” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 555–567, Sep. 2017,
doi: 10.1080/00313831.2016.1172501.
[37] M. Lucas, P. Bem-Haja, F. Siddiq, A. Moreira, and C. Redecker, “The relation between in-service teachers’ digital competence
and personal and contextual factors: What matters most?” Computers and Education, vol. 160, p. 104052, Jan. 2021, doi:
10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104052.
[38] J. Tondeur, K. Aesaert, S. Prestridge, and E. Consuegra, “A multilevel analysis of what matters in the training of pre-service
teacher’s ICT competencies,” Computers & Education, vol. 122, pp. 32–42, Jul. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.002.
[39] M. Ghomi and C. Redecker, “Digital competence of educators (DigCompedu): Development and evaluation of a self-assessment
instrument for teachers’ digital competence,” in CSEDU 2019 - Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer
Supported Education, 2019, vol. 1, pp. 541–548, doi: 10.5220/0007679005410548.
[40] J. Fraenkel, N. Wallen, and H. Hyun, How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education, 10th ed. Columbus, McGraw-Hill
Higher Education, 2009.
[41] W. G. Cochran, Sampling Techniques, 3rd ed. Nashvile: John Wiley & Sons, 1977.
[42] A. Sadaf, T. J. Newby, and P. A. Ertmer, “Exploring factors that predict preservice teachers’ intentions to use web 2.0
technologies using decomposed theory of planned behavior,” Journal of Research on Technology in Education, vol. 45, no. 2,
pp. 171–196, Dec. 2012, doi: 10.1080/15391523.2012.10782602.
[43] K. Kamaruddin, C. A. C. Abdullah, M. N. Idris, and M. N. M. Nawi, “Teachers’ level of ICT integration in teaching and learning:
A survey in Malaysian private preschool,” in AIP Conference Proceedings, 2017, vol. 1891, p. 20075, doi: 10.1063/1.5005408.
[44] R. Agarwal and J. Prasad, “A conceptual and operational definition of personal innovativeness in the domain of information
technology,” Information Systems Research, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 204–215, Jun. 1998, doi: 10.1287/isre.9.2.204.
[45] R. Christensen and G. Knezek, “Validating the technology proficiency self-assessment questionnaire for 21st century learning
(TPSA C-21),” Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 20–31, Jan. 2017, doi:
10.1080/21532974.2016.1242391.
[46] M. K. A. Semercí and A., “Öğretmenlerin bit tutumlari ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi,” Development of Teachers’ Bit Attitudes Scale,
vol. 46, no. 213, pp. 155–176, 2017.
[47] J. F. Hair, R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham, and W. C. Black, Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed. United Stated, Pearson Education
Limited, 2019.
[48] J. Cohen, Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2013.
[49] S. L. Wong, H. A. Jalil, A. F. M. Ayub, K. A. Bakar, and S. H. Tang, “Teaching a discrete information technology course in a
constructivist learning environment: Is it effective for Malaysian pre-service teachers?” Internet and Higher Education, vol. 6,
no. 2, pp. 193–204, Apr. 2003, doi: 10.1016/S1096-7516(03)00025-3.
[50] M. Taimalu and P. Luik, “The impact of beliefs and knowledge on the integration of technology among teacher educators: A path
analysis,” Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 79, pp. 101–110, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2018.12.012.
[51] A. Semerci and M. K. Aydın, “Examining high school teachers’ attitudes towards ICT Use in education,” International Journal
of Progressive Education, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 93–105, Apr. 2018, doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2018.139.7.
[52] F. Huang and T. Teo, “Influence of teacher-perceived organisational culture and school policy on Chinese teachers’ intention to
use technology: an extension of technology acceptance model,” Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 68,
no. 3, pp. 1547–1567, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11423-019-09722-y.
[53] E. P. Marpa, “Technology in the Teaching of mathematics: An analysis of Teachers’ attitudes during the COVID-19 pandemic,”
International Journal on Studies in Education, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 92–102, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.46328/ijonse.36.

Predicting teachers’ use of digital technology (Siti Syuhada Abu Hanifah)

562  ISSN: 2252-8822

BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS

Siti Syuhada Abu Hanifah is a teacher under Ministry of Education Malaysia for
14 years and currently a postgraduate student of Faculty Educational Studies, Universiti Putra
Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia. Her research interests are on digital competence and technology
utilization. She can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Norliza Ghazali is a senior lecturer at Universiti Putra Malaysia (Faculty of

Educational Studies), Selangor, Malaysia. Her research interests include online learning and
instrument development. Testing and assessment are among her areas of expertise. She can be
contacted at email: [email protected].

Ahmad Fauzi Mohd Ayub is a professor at Universiti Putra Malaysia (Faculty of

Educational Studies), Selangor, Malaysia. His research interests include information technology
and educational technology. His expertise encompasses multimedia and information
technologies in education. He can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Rosfuzah Roslan is a lecturer at Centre for Diploma Studies (CeDS), Universiti

Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM), Johor, Malaysia. Her research interests are in gamified
system and application with the implementation of IoT. She also has expertise developing apps
for virtual and augmented reality. She can be contacted at email: [email protected].

Int J Eval & Res Educ, Vol. 12, No. 2, June 2023: 555-562