INTRAPERSONAL TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION AS A MEDIATOR BETWEEN TEACHING COMPETENCE AND STUDENT ENGAGEMENT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v13i3.6550کلمات کلیدی:
student engagement, teaching competence, intrapersonal technology integration, TPACK, higher education, mediation analysis, teacher self-efficacyچکیده
This study investigates the relationship between teaching competence and student engagement, with intrapersonal technology integration as a mediating variable. Grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), the study employed a quantitative, non-experimental design using stratified sampling to survey 400 college students in the Davao Region. Descriptive statistics revealed high levels of intrapersonal technology integration and very high teaching competence, alongside generally high student engagement. Correlational analysis showed that both teaching competence and intrapersonal technology integration were positively and significantly associated with all dimensions of student engagement, with particularly strong correlations observed for online and cognitive engagement. Mediation analysis using Hayes' PROCESS model confirmed a partial mediation effect, with 54.5% of the total effect of teaching competence on student engagement transmitted through intrapersonal technology integration. These findings underscore the dual pathway of influence, affirming that while teaching competence independently drives student engagement, its impact is significantly amplified when educators possess internal motivation, confidence, and interest in using educational technology. The study contributes to the literature by offering a comprehensive, theory-driven model of engagement, and highlights the need for teacher development programs that cultivate both pedagogical skills and intrapersonal readiness for technology integration.
Article visualizations:
مراجع
Ajabnoor, S. M., & Fatima, R. (2024). Educational technology integration and its perceived barriers among university faculty: A cross-cultural perspective. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00459-x
Afzal, F., & Crawford, L. (2022). Student's perception of engagement in online project management education and its impact on performance: The mediating role of self-motivation. Project Leadership and Society, 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plas.2022.100057
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2023). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological understanding of the construct. Psychology in Schools 45(5). https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1985-98423-000
Buenviaje, L. M., Dizon, A. M., & Magat, D. B. (2023). Challenges and opportunities in online learning: Perspectives from Filipino higher education students. Philippine Journal of Education Studies, 18(2), 55–67. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1145/3514262.3514318
Castro, M. D. (2024). Revisiting student engagement: A conceptual update for the post-pandemic educational landscape. Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 8(1), 12–29.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Günüç, S. (2022). The role of educational technology in increasing university student engagement: A mixed-methods study. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, 6(2), 110–126.
Greener, S. (2022). The engaged learner: A conceptual framework for learner engagement in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 59(4), 377–390.
Inan, F. A., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Factors affecting technology integration in K–12 classrooms: A path model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9132-y
Kahu, E. R., Nelson, K., & Picton, C. (2020). Student engagement in the educational interface: Understanding the mechanisms of student success. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(1), 173–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1615416
Kardiyem, & Kusmuriyanto, K. (2022). Examining the global competence and TPACK development model for prospective teachers in accounting economics. Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif, 12(2), 759–772. https://doi.org/10.23960/jpp.v12.i2.2022.p759-772
Kassab, S. E., Al-Shafei, A. I., Salem, A. H., & Abu-Hijleh, M. (2022). Student engagement in medical education: A scoping review of the literature. Medical Science Educator, 32, 745–759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-022-01540-3
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70. Retrieved from https://citejournal.org/volume-9/issue-1-09/general/what-is-technological-pedagogicalcontent-knowledge/
Lai, C., Yeung, P., & Lin, S. (2021). The influence of TPACK and online teaching self-efficacy on student engagement: Evidence from remote learning during the pandemic. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(6), 1065–1086. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633121991901
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2002). Social cognitive career theory. In D. Brown (Ed.), Career choice and development (pp. 255–311). Jossey-Bass. Retrieved from https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-02552-005
Li, L., Worch, E., Zhou, Y., & Aguiton, R. (2019). How education technology impacts student engagement: A literature review. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 51(2), 163–181.
Lu, L. Y. (2020). Teacher self-efficacy and digital integration: A structural equation model. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 36(3), 178–192.
Marissa, D., & Allahji, W. (2021). Exploring EFL teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and student engagement in an emergency remote teaching context. Education Research International. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5534869
Maričić, M. (2024). Development and validation of the Higher Education Student Engagement Scale (HESES). International Journal of Educational Methodology, 10(1), 45–59.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers’ college record, 108(6), 1017-1054. Retrieved from https://one2oneheights.pbworks.com/f/MISHRA_PUNYA.pdf
Niederhauser, D. S., & Perkmen, S. (2008). Beyond self-efficacy: Measuring pre-service teachers’ instructional technology outcome expectations. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2753–2768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.12.002
Phan, T., Tran, H. V., Truong, T., Le, H. T., & Phan, D. M. (2024). Developing information technology competence in online education with the TPACK approach. Vietnam Journal of Education, 28(3), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.52296/vje.2024.361
Picton, C., & Baik, C. (2024). Rethinking engagement: Mapping academic and psychosocial enablers of student success. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 21(1), 33–48.
Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective teacher–student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 493–529. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311421793
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.2307/1175860
Singh, A., & Malik, N. (2024). Redefining teaching competency in the digital age: The contribution of TPACK. Journal of Informatics Education and Research, 18(1), 12–25. https://jier.org/index.php/journal/article/view/2228
Stronge, J. H., Ward, T. J., & Grant, L. W. (2011). What makes good teachers good? A cross-case analysis of the connection between teacher effectiveness and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(4), 339–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487111404241
Sugiharto, B., Sutrisno, A., & Wulandari, D. (2023). Online learning engagement among nursing students during the pandemic: A mixed-method study. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 20(1), 1–13.
Swank, J. M., Houseknecht, A., & Liu, Y. (2020). Development and validation of the Teaching Competencies Scale (TCS). Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 53(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1778634
Thomas, M., & Chukhlomin, V. (2020). Faculty attitudes toward online teaching competence and student engagement. Online Learning Journal, 24(3), 99–115.
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555–575.
Wang, A. (2022). Understanding levels of technology integration: A TPACK scale for EFL teachers to promote 21st-century learning. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 9935–9952. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11033-4
Zhou, H. (2025). Exploring the dynamic teaching-learning relationship in interactive learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2025.2462149
دانلودها
چاپ شده
شماره
نوع مقاله
مجوز
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
