Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Citizenship Teaching & Learning
  4. Volume 19, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 19, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 1751-1917
  • E-ISSN: 1751-1925

Abstract

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, education has recently undergone a rapid digitalization, necessitating the simultaneous adoption of several technologies by educators for online learning and instruction. This study will build a model that predicts student teachers’ extensive technology acceptance by extending the technology acceptance model (TAM) with their technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) and innovativeness. The survey ( = 870) will be used to collect the data for this study. The TAM has been shown to be a useful instrument for tracking the uptake of new technologies across a range of fields, including education. TAM, however, has been primarily used to gauge user acceptance of a certain technology deployment. With the development of numerous technologies, this study has expanded TAM to measure student teachers’ technology-enabled practice. The suggested model explains the behavioural purpose of student teachers to teach online. Our research identified the interrelated influences of TPACK, perceived utility (PU) and innovation on teachers’ behaviour and intention to teach online following the epidemic. In addition, the study found that student teachers’ TPACK and PU were significantly predicted by their training and institutional support. This study’s model conceptualization, which combines elements based on personal competence – including TPACK and innovativeness and information technology-based constructs – is original. Additionally, our work adds to the growing body of research on student teachers’ use of online instruction in the post-pandemic age.

© 2024 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/ctl_00164_1
2024-12-09
2025-05-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alzubi, J., Al-Qudah, J. and Jaradat, I. (2018), ‘Factors affecting students’ acceptance of e-learning systems in higher education’, Educational Gerontology, 44:4, pp. 299–308.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Camilleri, A. C. and Camilleri, M. A. (2019), ‘Mobile learning via educational apps: An interpretative study’, in Proceedings of the 2019 5th International Conference on Education and Training Technologies, Seoul, South Korea, 27–29 May, New York: Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 88–92, https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3337682.3337687.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Davis, F. (1989), ‘Student teachers’ perceptions of online learning’, Journal of Educational Technology, 12:2, pp. 123–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. He, W., Zhao, Y. and Li, H. (2018), ‘Factors influencing teachers’ adoption of mobile learning in higher education’, Educational Technology Research and Development, 66:3, pp. 795–814.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Rodrigues, A., Soeiro, A. and Alves, H. (2016), ‘Factors influencing students’ acceptance of e-learning: A review of the literature’, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14:1, p. 133–41.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Abdullah, F. and Ward, R. (2016), ‘Developing a general extended technology acceptance model for E-learning (GETAMEL) by analyzing commonly used external factors’, Computers in Human Behavior, 56, pp. 238–56, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.036.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Adedoyin, O. B. and Soykan, E. (2020), ‘Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities’, Interactive Learning Environments, 31:2, pp. 863–75, https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Akçayır, M. and Akçayır, G. (2017), ‘Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: A systematic review of the literature’, Educational Research Review, 20, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.002.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Akdim, K., Casaló, L. V. and Flavián, C. (2022), ‘The role of utilitarian and hedonic aspects in the continuance intention to use social mobile apps’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 66, pp. 123–45, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102888.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Akour, I. A., Al-Maroof, R. S., Alfaisal, R. and Salloum, S. A. (2022), ‘A conceptual framework for determining metaverse adoption in higher institutions of gulf area: An empirical study using hybrid SEM-ANN approach’, Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100052.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Al-Adwan, A. S. (2020), ‘Investigating the drivers and barriers to MOOCs adoption: The perspective of TAM’, Education and Information Technologies, 25:6, pp. 5771–95, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10250-z.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Al-Emran, M., Mezhuyev, V. and Kamaludin, A. (2018), ‘Technology acceptance model in M-learning context: A systematic review’, Computers & Education, 125, pp. 389–412, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.008.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Al-Rahmi, A. M., Al-Rahmi, W. M., Alturki, U., Aldraiweesh, A., Almutairy, S. and Al-Adwan, A. S. (2022), ‘Acceptance of mobile technologies and M-learning by university students: An empirical investigation in higher education’, Education and Information Technologies, 27:6, pp. 7805–26, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10934-8.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Bada, S. O. and Olusegun, S. (2015), ‘Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning’, Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5:6, pp. 66–70, https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-05616670.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Bergdahl, N. and Nouri, J. (2021), ‘Covid-19 and crisis-prompted distance education in Sweden’, Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 26:3, pp. 443–59, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-020-09470-6.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Bubou, G. M. and Job, G. C. (2022), ‘Individual innovativeness, self-efficacy and e-learning readiness of students of Yenagoa study centre, National Open University of Nigeria’, Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 15:1, pp. 2–22, https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-12-2019-0079.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Cabero-Almenara, J., Fernández-Batanero, J. M. and Barroso-Osuna, J. (2019), ‘Adoption of augmented reality technology by university students’, Heliyon, 5:5, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01597.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Celik, I. (2022), ‘Towards intelligent-TPACK: An empirical study on teachers’ professional knowledge to ethically integrate artificial intelligence (AI) based tools into education’, Computers in Human Behavior, 138, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107468.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Cenfetelli, R. T. (2004), ‘Inhibitors and enablers as dual factor concepts in technology usage’, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 5:11, pp. 472–92, https://aisel.aisnet.org/jais/vol5/iss11/16. Accessed 14 October 2024.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Chahal, J. and Rani, N. (2022), ‘Exploring the acceptance for e-learning among higher education students in India: Combining technology acceptance model with external variables’, Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 34:3, pp. 844–67, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-022-09327-0.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Chandra, Y. and Leenders, M. A. (2012), ‘User innovation and entrepreneurship in the virtual world: A study of Second Life residents’, Technovation, 32:7–8, pp. 464–76, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2012.02.002.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Chen, J. (2022), ‘Adoption of M-learning apps: A sequential mediation analysis and the moderating role of personal innovativeness in information technology’, Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 8, pp. 125–36, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100237.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Damşa, C., Langford, M., Uehara, D. and Scherer, R. (2021), ‘Teachers’ agency and online education in times of crisis’, Computers in Human Behavior, 121:8, pp. 125–36, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106793.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. De Graaf, E. and Kolmos, A. (2003), ‘Characteristics of problem-based learning’, International Journal of Engineering Education, 19:5, pp. 657–62.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Di Pietro, R. and Cresci, S. (2021), ‘Metaverse: Security and privacy issues’, in 2021 Third IEEE International Conference on Trust, Privacy and Security in Intelligent Systems and Applications (TPS-ISA), 13–15 December, Atlanta, GA: IEEE, pp. 281–88, https://doi.org/10.1109/TPSISA52974.2021.00032.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Dou, K., Yu, P., Deng, N., Liu, F., Guan, Y., Li, Z. and Duan, H. (2017), ‘Patients’ acceptance of smartphone health technology for chronic disease management: A theoretical model and empirical test’, JMIR MHealth and UHealth, 5:12, https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.7886.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Durak, H. Y. (2018), ‘Flipped learning readiness in teaching programming in middle schools: Modelling its relation to various variables’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34:6, pp. 939–59, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12302.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Dwivedi, Y. K., Hughes, L., Baabdullah, A. M., Ribeiro-Navarrete, S., Giannakis, M., Al-Debei, M. M. and Wamba, S. F. (2022), ‘Metaverse beyond the hype: Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy’, International Journal of Information Management, 66, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102542.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Gudmundsdottir, G. B. and Hathaway, D. M. (2020), ‘We always make it work: Teachers’ agency in the time of crisis’, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28:2, pp. 239–50.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Hong, X., Zhang, M. and Liu, Q. (2021), ‘Preschool teachers’ technology acceptance during the COVID-19: An adapted technology acceptance model’, Frontiers in Psychology, 12, pp.1–37, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.691492.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Ifinedo, E., Rikala, J. and Hamalainen, T. (2020), ‘Factors affecting Nigerian teacher educators’ technology integration: Considering characteristics, knowledge constructs ICT practices and beliefs’, Computers and Education, 66:3, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103760.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Jensen, U. T. (2020), ‘Is self-reported social distancing susceptible to social desirability bias? Using the crosswise model to elicit sensitive behaviors’, Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, 3:2, pp. 1–11, https://doi.org/10.30636/jbpa.32.182.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Joo, Y. J., Lee, H. W. and Ham, Y. (2014), ‘Integrating user interface and personal innovativeness into the TAM for mobile learning in cyber university’, Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 26:2, pp. 143–58, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-014-9081-2.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Kabudi, T., Pappas, I. and Olsen, D. H. (2021), ‘AI-enabled adaptive learning systems: A systematic mapping of the literature’, Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2:1, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100017.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Khan, T., Johnston, K. and Ophoff, J. (2019), ‘The impact of an augmented reality application on learning motivation of students’, Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, 19:1, pp. 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/7208494.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Khlaif, Z. N., Sanmugam, M. and Ayyoub, A. (2022), ‘Impact of techno stress on continuance intentions to use mobile technology’, The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00638-x.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Kim, J. H., Lee, B. S. and Choi, S. J. (2022), ‘A study on metaverse construction and use cases for non-faceto-face education’, The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology, 8:1, pp. 483–97, https://doi.org/10.17703/JCCT.2022.8.1.483.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Larionova, V., Brown, K., Bystrova, T. and Sinitsyn, E. (2018), ‘Russian perspectives of online learning technologies in higher education: An empirical study of a MOOC’, Research in Comparative and International Education, 13:1, pp. 70–91, https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499918763420.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Le, V. T., Nguyen, N. H., Tran, T. L. N., Nguyen, L. T., Nguyen, T. A. and Nguyen, M. T. (2022), ‘The interaction patterns of pandemic-initiated online teaching: How teachers adapted’, System, 105:2, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102755.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Lee, L. H., Braud, T., Zhou, P., Wang, L., Xu, D., Lin, Z. and Hui, P. (2021), ‘All one needs to know about metaverse: A complete survey on technological singularity, virtual ecosystem, and research agenda’, arXiv, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2110.05352.
  42. Luo, Y. and Du, H. (2022), ‘Learning with desktop virtual reality: Changes and interrelationship of self-efficacy, goal orientation, technology acceptance and learning behavior’, Smart Learning Environments, 9:1, pp. 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00203-z.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Mailizar, M., Burg, D. and Maulina, S. (2021), ‘Examining university students’ behavioural intention to use e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: An extended TAM model’, Education and Information Technologies, 26:6, pp. 7057–77, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10557-5.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Marks, B. and Thomas, J. (2022), ‘Adoption of virtual reality technology in higher education: An evaluation of five teaching semesters in a purpose-designed laboratory’, Education and Information Technologies, 27:1, pp. 1287–305, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10653-6.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Martinho, D. S., Santos, E. M., Miguel, M. I. and Cordeiro, D. S. (2018), ‘Factors that influence the adoption of postgraduate online courses’, International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 13:12, pp. 123–41, https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i12.8864.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Memon, M. A., Ting, H., Cheah, J. H., Thurasamy, R., Chuah, F. and Cham, T. H. (2020), ‘Sample size for survey research: Review and recommendations’, Journal of Applied Structural Equation Modeling, 4:2, pp. i–xx, https://doi.org/10.47263/.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Menabo, L., Sansavini, A., Brighi, A., Skrzypiec, G. and Guarini, A. (2021), ‘Promoting the integration of technology in teaching: An analysis of the factors that increase the intention to use technologies among Italian teachers’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37:6, pp. 1566–77, https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12554.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Nguyen, A., Tuunanen, T., Gardner, L. and Sheridan, D. (2021), ‘Design principles for learning analytic information systems in higher education’, European Journal of Information Systems, 30:5, pp. 541–68, https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1816144.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Paetsch, J. and Drechsel, B. (2021), ‘Factors influencing pre-service teachers’ intention to use digital learning materials: A study conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany’, Frontiers in Psychology, 12, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.733830.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N. and Hoagwood, K. (2015), ‘Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research’, Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 42:5, pp. 533–44, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Pappas, I. O. and Giannakos, M. N. (2021), ‘Rethinking learning design in IT education during a pandemic’, Frontiers in Education, 6, pp. 1–18.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y. and Podsakoff, N. P. (2003), ‘Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies’, The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88:5, pp. 879–903.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Prieto, J., Lacasa, P. and Martínez-Borda, R. (2022), ‘Approaching metaverses: Mixed reality interfaces in youth media platforms’, New Techno Humanities, 12:2, pp. 136–45, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techum.2022.04.004.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Punnoose, A. C. (2012), ‘Determinants of intention to use eLearning based on the technology acceptance model’, Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 11:1, pp. 301–37, https://doi.org/10.28945/1744.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Quintana, M. G. B. and Fernández, S. M. (2015), ‘A pedagogical model to develop teaching skills. The collaborative learning experience in the immersive virtual world TYMMI’, Computers in Human Behavior, 51, pp. 594–603, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.016.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Raaij, E. M. and Schepers, J. J. (2008), ‘The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China’, Computers & Education, 50:3, pp. 838–52, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.001.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Rogers, E. M. (2003), Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed., New York: Free Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Roy, S. K., Balaji, M. S., Quazi, A. and Quaddus, M. (2018), ‘Predictors of customer acceptance of and resistance to smart technologies in the retail sector’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 42, pp. 147–60, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.02.005.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Salahdine, F. and Kaabouch, N. (2019), ‘Social engineering attacks: A survey’, Future Internet, 11:4, https://doi.org/10.3390/fi11040089.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Salloum, S. A., Al-Emran, M., Habes, M., Alghizzawi, M., Ghani, M. A. and Shaalan, K. (2021), ‘What impacts the acceptance of E-learning through social media? An empirical study’, Recent Advances in Technology Acceptance Models and Theories, pp. 419–31, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64987-6_24.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Sangeeta and Tandon, U. (2021), ‘Factors influencing adoption of online teaching by school teachers: A study during COVID-19 pandemic’, Journal of Public Affairs, 21:4, https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2503.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Sarosa, S. (2022), ‘The effect of perceived risks and perceived cost on using online learning by high school students’, Procedia Computer Science, 197, pp. 477–83, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.12.164.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Schmitz, A., Díaz-Martín, A. M. and Guillén, M. J. Y. (2022), ‘Modifying UTAUT2 for a cross-country comparison of telemedicine adoption’, Computers in Human Behavior, 130:5, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107183.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Schweitzer, F. and Van den Hende, E. A. (2016), ‘To be or not to be in thrall to the march of smart products’, Psychology & Marketing, 33:10, pp. 830–42, https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20920.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Sebastian, G. (2022), ‘A study on metaverse awareness, cyber risks, and steps for increased adoption’, International Journal of Security and Privacy in Pervasive Computing, 14:1, pp. 1–11, https://doi.org/10.4018/IJSPPC.308785.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Shen, S., Xu, K., Sotiriadis, M. and Wang, Y. (2022), ‘Exploring the factors influencing the adoption and usage of augmented reality and virtual reality applications in tourism education within the context of COVID-19 pandemic’, Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport & Tourism Education, 25:1, pp. 319–52, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2022.100373.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Siyal, A. W., Donghong, D., Umrani, W. A., Siyal, S. and Bhand, S. (2019), ‘Predicting mobile banking acceptance and loyalty in Chinese bank customers’, Sage Open, 3:1, https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019844084.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Suh, W. and Ahn, S. (2022), ‘Utilizing the metaverse for learner-centered constructivist education in the post-pandemic era: An analysis of elementary school students’, Journal of Intelligence, 10:1, p. 17, https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence10010017.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Suzuki, S. N., Kanematsu, H., Barry, D. M., Ogawa, N., Yajima, K., Nakahira, K. T. and Yoshitake, M. (2020), ‘Virtual experiments in metaverse and their applications to collaborative projects: The framework and its significance’, Procedia Computer Science, 176, pp. 2125–32, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.09.249.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Taherdoost, H. (2018), ‘A review of technology acceptance and adoption models and theories’, Procedia Manufacturing, 22, pp. 960–67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.03.137.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Tam, C., Santos, D. and Oliveira, T. (2020), ‘Exploring the influential factors of continuance intention to use mobile apps: Extending the expectation confirmation model’, Information Systems Frontiers, 22:1, pp. 243–57, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-018-9864-5.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Tang, Y. (2021), ‘Help first-year college students to learn their library through an augmented reality game’, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47:1, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2020.102294.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Tarouco, L., Gorziza, B., Corrêa, Y., Amaral, É. M. and Müller, T. (2013), ‘Virtual laboratory for teaching calculus: An immersive experience’, in 2013 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Berlin, Germany, 13–15 March, Berlin: IEEE, pp. 774–81.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Tay, L. Y., Lee, S.-S. and Ramachandran, K. (2021), ‘Implementation of online home-based learning and students’ engagement during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case study of Singapore mathematics teachers’, The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30:3, pp. 299–310, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00572-y.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Tegoan, N., Wibowo, S. and Grandhi, S. (2021), ‘Application of the extended reality technology for teaching new languages: A systematic review’, Applied Sciences, 11:23, https://doi.org/10.3390/app112311360.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Teng, Z., Cai, Y., Gao, Y., Zhang, X. and Li, X. (2022), ‘Factors affecting learners’ adoption of an educational metaverse platform: An empirical study based on an extended UTAUT model’, Mobile Information Systems, 22:1, pp. 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5479215.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Thongsri, N., Shen, L. and Bao, Y. (2020), ‘Investigating academic major differences in perception of computer self-efficacy and intention toward e-learning adoption in China’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57:5, pp. 577–89, https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2019.1585904.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Tlili, A., Huang, R., Shehata, B., Liu, D., Zhao, J., Metwally, A. H. S. and Burgos, D. (2022), ‘Is metaverse in education a blessing or a curse: A combined content and bibliometric analysis’, Smart Learning Environments, 9:1, pp. 1–31, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00205-x.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Trinh, H. N., Tran, H. H. and Vuong, D. H. Q. (2020), ‘Determinants of consumers’ intention to use credit card: A perspective of multifaceted perceived risk’, Asian Journal of Economics and Banking, 4:3, pp. 105–20, https://doi.org/10.1108/AJEB-06-2020-0018.
     [Google Scholar]
  80. van der Heijden, H. (2004), ‘User acceptance of hedonic information systems’, MIS Quarterly, 28:1, pp. 695–704, https://doi.org/10.2307/25148660.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Venkatesh, V. and Davis, F. D. (2000), ‘A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies’, Management Science, 46:2, pp. 186–204.
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. and Xu, X. (2012), ‘Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology’, MIS Quarterly, 36:1, pp. 157–78, https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J. and van Braak, J. (2013), ‘Technological pedagogical content knowledge a review of the literature’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29:2, pp. 109–21, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Wang, W. T. and Lin, Y. L. (2021), ‘The relationships among students’ personal innovativeness, compatibility, and learning performance: A social cognitive theory perspective’, Educational Technology & Society, 24:2, pp. 14–27, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27004928. Accessed 10 October 2024.
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Wong, G. K. W. (2016), ‘The behavioral intentions of Hong Kong primary teachers in adopting educational technology’, Educational Technology Research and Development, 64:2, pp. 313–38, https://doi.org/10.1007s11423-016-9426-9.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. Wu, L., Li, J. Y. and Fu, C. Y. (2011), ‘The adoption of mobile healthcare by hospital’s professionals: An integrative perspective’, Decision Support Systems, 51:3, pp. 587–96, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2011.03.003.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Yang, F., Ren, L. and Gu, C. (2022), ‘A study of college students’ intention to use metaverse technology for basketball learning based on UTAUT2’, Heliyon, 8:9, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10562.
     [Google Scholar]
  88. Yeh, Y.-F., Chan, K. K. H. and Hsu, Y.-S. (2021), ‘Toward a framework that connects individual TPACK and collective TPACK: A systematic review of TPACK studies investigating teacher collaborative discourse in the learning by design process’, Computers and Education, 171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104238.
     [Google Scholar]
  89. Zimmermann, F., Melle, I. and Huwer, J. (2021), ‘Developing prospective chemistry teachers’ TPACK-A comparison between students of two different universities and expertise levels regarding their TPACK self-efficacy, attitude, and lesson planning competence’, Journal of Chemical Education, 98:6, pp. 1863–74, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c01296.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/ctl_00164_1
Loading
The behavioural intention of student teachers for online learning after the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey
Citizenship Teaching & Learning 19, 267 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1386/ctl_00164_1
/content/journals/10.1386/ctl_00164_1
/content/journals/10.1386/ctl_00164_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): behaviour; COVID-19; education; innovativeness; online learning; teaching; technology

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test