Abstract
The importance and dynamic development of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) has been well recognized. In order to keep up with the development of the ever-changing society and variety of teaching technologies, teachers need to continue to learn TPACK. Previous studies indicated the importance of student engagement in promoting teachers’ learning. However, how student engagement affects teachers’ continuous learning of TPACK remains unclear. To bridge the research gap, our study constructed a model based on the stimulus-organism-response (SOR) framework and integrative model of behavior prediction (IMBP). It examined how student engagement affects teachers’ psychological state and behavioral performance for continuous learning of TPACK. The model was then validated by structural equation modeling with 395 questionnaire data. The results demonstrated the positive relationships between student engagement (behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement), teachers’ psychological states (attitude, subjective norm, self-efficacy, and behavioral intention), and continuous learning of TPACK. These findings inform how to promote teachers to keep learning TPACK.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303
Bai, B., Wang, J., & Chai, C. S. (2021). Understanding Hong Kong primary school English teachers’ continuance intention to teach with ICT. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(4), 528–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1627459
Baroody, A. E., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Larsen, R. A., & Curby, T. W. (2016). A multi-method approach for describing the contributions of student engagement on fifth grade students’ social competence and achievement in mathematics. Learning and Individual Differences, 48, 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.02.012
Battjes-fries, M. C. E., Dongen, E. J. I., Van, Renes, R. J., Meester, H. J., & Van Veer, P. (2016). Unravelling the effect of the Dutch school-based nutrition programme Taste Lessons: the role of dose, appreciation and interpersonal communication. Bmc Public Health, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3430-1
Berry, A. (2020). Disrupting to Driving: Exploring upper primary teachers’ perspectives on student engagement. Teachers and Teaching, 26(2), 145–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2020.1757421
Bobis, J., Anderson, J., Martin, A., & Way, J. (2011). A model for mathematics instruction to enhance student motivation and engagement. In D. Brahier (Ed.), Motivation and disposition: Pathways to learning mathematics, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Seventy-third Yearbook (pp. 31–42). Reston Va.: NCTM
Briñol, P., Gandarillas, B., Horcajo, J., & Becerra, A. (2010). Emotion and meta-cognition: Implications for attitude change. International Journal of Social Psychology, 25(2), 157–183. https://doi.org/10.1174/021347410791063787
Byrne, B. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS. Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge
Carmi, T., & Tamir, E. (2021). Who Learns to Teach? Student-Teachers as Change Agents, Mentor-Teachers as Learners. European Journal of Teacher Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1975677
Carvalho, C., Santos, N. N., António, R., & Martins, D. S. M. (2020). Supporting students’ engagement with teachers’ feedback: The role of students’ school identification. Educational Psychology, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2020.1849564
Chen, C. P., Lai, H. M., & Ho, C. Y. (2015). Why do teachers continue to use teaching blogs? The roles of perceived voluntariness and habit. Computers & Education, 82, 236–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.017
Choi, J., Lee, J. H., & Kim, B. (2019). How does learner-centered education affect teacher self-efficacy? The case of project-based learning in Korea. Teaching and Teacher Education, 85, 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.05.005
Chen, M., Zhou, C., Meng, C., & Wu, D. (2019). How to promote Chinese primary and secondary school teachers to use ICT to develop high-quality teaching activities. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(6), 1593–1611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09677-0
Collado-Rivera, M., Branscum, P., Larson, D., & Gao, H. (2018). Evaluating the determinants of sugary beverage consumption among overweight and obese adults: An application of the integrative model of behavioural prediction. Health Education Journal, 77(1), 109–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0017896917739330
de Ruiter, J. A., Poorthuis, A. M. G., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2019). Relevant classroom events for teachers: A study of student characteristics, student behaviors, and associated teacher emotions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 102899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102899
Fatou, N., & Kubiszewski, V. (2018). Are perceived school climate dimensions predictive of students’ engagement? Social Psychology of Education, 21(2), 427–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9422-x
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2011). Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach. New York, NY: Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838020
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural Equation Models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800313
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
Gan, C. L., & Balakrishnan, V. (2018). Mobile Technology in the Classroom: What Drives Student-Lecturer Interactions? International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 34(7), 666–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2017.1380970
Geng, L., Zheng, Q., Zhong, X., & Li, L. (2020). Longitudinal Relations Between Students’ Engagement and Their Perceived Relationships with Teachers and Peers in a Chinese Secondary School. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29(2), 171–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00463-3
Goldberg, P., Schwerter, J., Seidel, T., Müller, K., & Stürmer, K. (2021). How does learners’ behavior attract preservice teachers’ attention during teaching? Teaching and Teacher Education, 97, 103213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103213
Hagenauer, G., Hascher, T., & Volet, S. E. (2015). Teacher emotions in the classroom: Associations with students’ engagement, classroom discipline and the interpersonal teacher-student relationship. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 30(4), 385–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-015-0250-0
Huang, F. (2019). Examining students’ continued use of desktop services: Perspectives from expectation-confirmation and social influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 96, 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.010
Huang, F., Teo, T., Sánchez-Prieto, J. C., García-Peñalvo, F. J., & Olmos-Migueláñez, S. (2019). Cultural values and technology adoption: A model comparison with university teachers from China and Spain. Computers and Education, 133, 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.01.012
ISTE (2017). ISTE STANDARDS FOR EDUCATORS. Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/standards/for-educators
Jin, H. Y., Su, C. Y., & Chen, C. H. (2021). Perceptions of teachers regarding the perceived implementation of creative pedagogy in “making” activities. The Journal of Educational Research, 114(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2021.1872471
Kaiser, J., Retelsdorf, J., Südkamp, A., & Möller, J. (2013). Achievement and engagement: How student characteristics influence teacher judgments. Learning and Instruction, 28, 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.06.001
Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2019). Evaluating pre-service kindergarten teachers’ intention to adopt and use tablets into teaching practice for natural sciences. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 13(1), 113–127. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMLO.2019.096479
Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What Happens When Teachers Design Educational Technology? The Development of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.2190/0EW7-01WB-BKHL-QDYV
Koh, J. H. L. (2019). TPACK design scaffolds for supporting teacher pedagogical change. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(3), 577–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9627-5
Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Lim, W. Y. (2017). Teacher Professional Development for TPACK-21CL: Effects on Teacher ICT Integration and Student Outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(2), 172–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116656848
Lauermann, F., & Berger, J. L. (2021). Linking teacher self-efficacy and responsibility with teachers’ self-reported and student-reported motivating styles and student engagement. Learning and Instruction, 76, 101441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101441
Lee, J., Cerreto, F. A., & Lee, J. (2010). Theory of planned behavior and teachers’ decisions regarding use of educational technology. Educational Technology & Society, 13(1), 152–164
Lin, K. Y., & Williams, P. J. (2016). Taiwanese preservice teachers’ science, technology, engineering, and mathematics teaching intention. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 14, 1021–1036. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9645-2
Lin, S. H., Lee, H. C., Chang, C. T., & Fu, J., C (2020). Behavioral intention towards mobile learning in Taiwan, China, Indonesia, and Vietnam. Technology in Society, 63, 101387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101387
Lin, S. H., & Huang, Y. C. (2018). Assessing College Student Engagement: Development and Validation of the Student Course Engagement Scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36(7), 694–708. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282917697618
Liu, N., & Pu, Q. (2020). Factors influencing learners’ continuance intention toward one-to-one online learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1857785
Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J. A. (1974). An approach to environment psychology. Cambridge: MIT Press
Napoles, J., & MacLeod, R. B. (2016). Influences of Teacher Delivery, Student Engagement, and Observation Focus on Preservice Teachers’ Perceptions of Teaching Effectiveness. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 25(3), 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083715580436
Nikolopoulou, K., Gialamas, V., & Lavidas, K. (2020). Acceptance of mobile phone by university students for their studies: An investigation applying UTAUT2 model. Education and Information Technologies, 25(5), 4139–4155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10157-9
Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing Teacher Professional Learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311413609
Palczyńska, M., & Rynko, M. (2020). ICT skills measurement in social surveys: Can we trust self-reports? Quality and quantity, 55, 917–943. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01031-4
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 539–569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903
Publications Office of the European Union (2017). European Commission. European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu. Retrieved from https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC107466
Putwain, D. W., Symes, W., Nicholson, L. J., & Becker, S. (2018). Achievement goals, behavioural engagement, and mathematics achievement: A mediational analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 68, 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.09.006
Ritoša, A., Danielsson, H., Sjöman, M., Almqvist, L., & Granlund, M. (2020). Assessing School Engagement – Adaptation and Validation of “Engagement Versus Disaffection With Learning: Teacher Report” in the Swedish Educational Context. Frontiers in Education, 5, 521972. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.521972
Ruble, L. A., McGrew, J. H., Wong, W. H., & Missall, K. N. (2018). Special Education Teachers’ Perceptions and Intentions Toward Data Collection. Journal of Early Intervention, 40(2), 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815118771391
Saeed Al-Maroof, R., Alhumaid, K., & Salloum, S. (2020). The Continuous Intention to Use E-Learning, from Two Different Perspectives. Education Sciences, 11(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010006
Saikkonen, L., & Kaarakainen, M. T. (2021). Multivariate analysis of teachers’ digital information skills—The importance of available resources. Computers & Education, 168, 104206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104206
Sakellariou, M., & Tsiara, E. (2020). Student Disaffection: The Contribution of Greek In-service Kindergarten Teachers in Engaging Each Preschooler in Learning. Behavioral Sciences, 10(2), 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs10020051
Salleh, S. M., Musa, J., Jaidin, J. H., & Shahrill, M. (2021). Development of TVET Teachers’ Beliefs about Technology Enriched Instruction through Professional Development Workshops: Application of the Technology Acceptance Model. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 13(2), 25–33. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2021.13.02.003
Saubern, R., Henderson, M., Heinrich, E., & Redmond, P. (2020). TPACK – time to reboot? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6378
Tondeur, J., Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Baran, E. (2020). Enhancing pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): A mixed-method study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 319–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09692-1
Ursava, Ö. F., Yalçın, Y., & Bakır, E. (2019). The effect of subjective norms on preservice and in‐service teachers’ behavioural intentions to use technology: A multigroup multimodel study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2501–2519. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12834
Valtonen, T., Kukkonen, J., Kontkanen, S., Sormunen, K., Dillon, P., & Sointu, E. (2015). The impact of authentic learning experiences with ICT on pre-service teachers’ intentions to use ICT for teaching and learning. Computers & Education, 81, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.09.008
Wang, J., Tigelaar, D. E. H., & Admiraal, W. (2019). Connecting rural schools to quality education: Rural teachers’ use of digital educational resources. Computers in Human Behavior, 101, 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.009
Wang, J., Tigelaar, D. E. H., & Admiraal, W. (2021). Rural teachers’ sharing of digital educational resources: From motivation to behavior. Computers & Education, 161, 104055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104055
Wang, M. T., Fredricks, J. A., Ye, F., Hofkens, T. L., & Linn, J. S. (2016). The Math and Science Engagement Scales: Scale development, validation, and psychometric properties. Learning and Instruction, 43, 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.008
Wombacher, K., Dai, M., Matig, J. J., & Harrington, N. G. (2018). Using the integrative model of behavioral prediction to understand college students’ STI testing beliefs, intentions, and behaviors. Journal of American College Health, 66(7), 674–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/07448481.2018.1454928
Yan, M., Filieri, R., & Gorton, M. (2021). Continuance intention of online technologies: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Information Management, 58, 102315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102315
Yu, K. C. C., Wu, P. H., Lin, K. Y., Fan, S. C., Tzeng, S. Y., & Ku, C. J. (2021). Behavioral intentions of technology teachers to implement an engineering-focused curriculum. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00305-z
Zhao, Y., Wang, A., & Sun, Y. (2020). Technological environment, virtual experience, and MOOC continuance: A stimulus–organism–response perspective. Computers & Education, 144, 103721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103721
Zhu, Y., Zhang, J. H., Au, W., & Yates, G. (2020). University students’ online learning attitudes and continuous intention to undertake online courses: A self-regulated learning perspective. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(3), 1485–1519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09753-w
Funding
This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant numbers 62177026, 61907018]; the Central China Normal University National Teacher Development Collaborative Innovation Experimental Base Construction Research Project [grant number CCNUTEIII 2021-01].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix
Appendix
Constructs | Items |
|---|---|
Students’ behavioral engagement (SBE) | SBE1. When I carry out ICT-based teaching activities, students work as hard as they can. |
SBE2. When I carry out ICT-based teaching activities, students listen carefully. | |
SBE3. When I carry out ICT-based teaching activities, students get prepared in advance. | |
Students’ emotional engagement (SEE) | SEE1. When I carry out ICT-based teaching activities, students are enthusiastic. |
SEE2. When I carry out ICT-based teaching activities, students tend to be happy. | |
SEE3. When I use ICT tools to start something new in class, students are interested. | |
SEE4. When I use ICT tools to arrange course tasks, students seem to enjoy the tasks. | |
Students’ cognitive engagement (SCE) | SCE1. When I carry out ICT-based teaching activities, students try to connect what they are learning to what they have learned. |
SCE2. When I carry out ICT-based teaching activities, students try to solve complex problems. | |
SCE3. After I carry out ICT-based teaching activities, students tend to perform better in their coursework. | |
SCE4. After I carry out ICT-based teaching activities, students try to understand and correct their mistakes. | |
Attitude (AT) | AT1. Learning TPACK is an indispensable part of my professional development. |
AT2. Learning TPACK provides the possibility to improve my teaching quality. | |
AT3. I look forward to learning TPACK in teaching and research activities. | |
AT4. It is a pleasant experience to continuously learn TPACK to improve classroom effectiveness. | |
Subjective norm (SN) | SN1. Students’ performance in class makes me feel that I need to learn ICT-related teaching strategies. |
SN2. Students’ performance in class makes me feel that I need to explore innovative ways to use ICT for teaching. | |
SN3. Students’ performance in class makes me feel that I need to improve my ability to create digital teaching resources. | |
SN4. Students’ performance in class makes me feel that I need to be more skilled in using ICT tools. | |
Self-efficacy (SE) | SE1. I have the confidence to learn ICT-related teaching strategies. |
SE2. I have the confidence to learn the method of applying ICT to innovate teaching activities. | |
SE3. I am confident that I know how to learn the skills of creating digital teaching resources. | |
SE4. I have the confidence to learn the skills of using ICT tools for teaching. | |
Behavioral intention (BI) | BI1. I will continue to learn TPACK. |
BI2. I will learn TPACK from various channels. | |
BI3. I have a high willingness to learn TPACK continuously. | |
Continuous learning of TPACK (CL) | CL1. I learn the basic theoretical knowledge of ICT-based teaching. |
CL2. I learn how to create digital teaching resources (e.g., electronic courseware, micro-video). | |
CL3. I learn how to use ICT tools for teaching (e.g., electronic whiteboard, subject software, and tools). | |
CL4. I learn how to use online teaching/research platforms (e.g., online professional development platforms). |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhou, C., Wu, D., Li, Y. et al. The role of student engagement in promoting teachers’ continuous learning of TPACK: based on a stimulus-organism-response framework and an integrative model of behavior prediction. Educ Inf Technol 28, 2207–2227 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11237-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11237-8