Research Article

Analyzing the effect of ICT engagement on academic performance: A PLS-SEM approach mediated by intrinsic motivation

Luis Miguel Olórtegui-Alcalde 1 , Franklin Cordova-Buiza 2 *
More Detail
1 Professional School of Business Administration, Universidad Autónoma del Perú, Lima, PERU2 Research, Innovation and Sustainability Department, Universidad Privada del Norte, Lima, Peru* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(3), 2026, ep663, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/18690
Published: 30 May 2026
OPEN ACCESS   70 Views   33 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study examines how engagement with information and communication technologies (ICT) relates to university students’ academic performance, considering intrinsic motivation as a mediator and platform usability as an enabling condition. A quantitative, cross-sectional, correlational, and descriptive design was implemented with 385 students from a university in Lima (Peru), selected through non-probability convenience sampling. Data were collected using a structured 5-point Likert questionnaire measuring platform usability, ICT engagement, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Academic performance was operationalized as self-reported semester GPA using the national 0-20 grading scale. The model was tested using PLS-SEM (SmartPLS 4) with a bootstrapping procedure of 5,000 subsamples. Results indicated a strong association between platform usability and ICT engagement (β = 0.78). ICT engagement showed positive effects on intrinsic motivation (β = 0.64) and extrinsic motivation (β = 0.42). Intrinsic motivation was positively related to academic performance (β = 0.55) and mediated the relationship between ICT engagement and performance (indirect effect = 0.35). Platform usability also exerted an indirect effect on performance through engagement and intrinsic motivation (0.43). Overall, the findings suggest that ICT engagement translates into better academic outcomes primarily when digital platforms are usable and instructional strategies foster intrinsic motivation and autonomous learning.
Keywords: ICT, student engagement, intrinsic motivation, academic performance, PLS-SEM

CITATION (APA)

Olórtegui-Alcalde, L. M., & Cordova-Buiza, F. (2026). Analyzing the effect of ICT engagement on academic performance: A PLS-SEM approach mediated by intrinsic motivation. Contemporary Educational Technology, 18(3), ep663. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/18690

REFERENCES

  1. Abbad, M. M. (2021). Using the UTAUT model to understand students’ usage of e-learning systems in developing countries. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 7205-7224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10573-5
  2. Al-Fraihat, D., Alshahrani, A. M., Alzaidi, M., Shaikh, A. A., Al-Obeidallah, M., & Al-Okaily, M. (2025). Exploring students’ perceptions of the design and use of the Moodle learning management system. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 18, Article 100685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100685
  3. Almarghani, E. M., & Mijatovic, I. (2017). Factors affecting student engagement in HEIs—It is all about good teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 22(8), 940-956. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1319808
  4. Anthonysamy, L., Koo, A. C., & Hew, S. H. (2020). Self-regulated learning strategies in higher education: Fostering digital literacy for sustainable lifelong learning. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 2393-2414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10201-8
  5. Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., Van Ginkel, S., Macfadyen, L. P., & Biemans, H. J. (2022). A systematic review of the role of learning analytics in enhancing feedback practices in higher education. Educational Research Review, 37, Article 100489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100489
  6. Bergdahl, N., Bond, M., Sjöberg, J., Dougherty, M., & Oxley, E. (2024). Unpacking student engagement in higher education learning analytics: A systematic review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21, Article 63. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-024-00493-y
  7. Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007
  8. Cavalcanti, A. P., Barbosa, A., Carvalho, R., Freitas, F., Tsai, Y.-S., Gašević, D., & Mello, R. F. (2021). Automatic feedback in online learning environments: A systematic literature review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, Article 100027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100027
  9. Chiu, T. K. F. (2022). Applying the self-determination theory (SDT) to explain student engagement in online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(1), S14-S30. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2021.1891998
  10. 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
  11. de Vreugd, L., van Leeuwen, A., & van der Schaaf, M. (2025). Students’ use of a learning analytics dashboard and influence of reference frames: Goal setting, motivation, and performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 41, Article e70015. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.70015
  12. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2016). Optimizing students’ motivation in the era of testing and pressure: A self-determination theory perspective. In W. Liu, J. Wang, & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Building autonomous learners (pp. 9-29). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-630-0_2
  13. Dobashi, K., Ho, C. P., Fulford, C. P., Lin, M.-F., & Higa, C. (2022). Learning pattern classification using moodle logs and the visualization of browsing processes by time-series cross-section. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, Article 100105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100105
  14. Drugova, E., Zhuravleva, I., Zakharova, U., & Latipov, A. (2024). Learning analytics driven improvements in learning design in higher education: A systematic literature review. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(2), 510-524. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12894
  15. Emerson, A., Cloude, E. B., Azevedo, R., & Lester, J. (2020). Multimodal learning analytics for game-based learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(5), 1505-1526. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12992
  16. Fang, X., & Chiu, T. K. F. (2025). Using self-determination theory to explain how mind mapping and real-time commenting enhance student engagement and learning outcomes in video creation. Computers and Education Open, 8, Article 100254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100254
  17. Flanagan, B., Majumdar, R., & Ogata, H. (2022). Early-warning prediction of student performance and engagement in open book assessment by reading behavior analysis. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19, Article 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00348-4
  18. Fuentes, R. P., & LaBad, R. B. (2025). Impact of digital learning tools on student engagement and academic achievement in higher education: A systematic review. Ennoia Advances in Social Science, Technology and Education, 1(2), 53-73. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16430142
  19. Gallagher, T., Slof, B., van der Schaaf, M., Toyoda, R., Tehreem, Y., Garcia Fracaro, S., & Kester, L. (2024). Reference frames for learning analytics dashboards: The progress and social reference frame and occupational self-efficacy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(2), 742-760. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12912
  20. Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001
  21. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2-24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203
  22. Hasan, N., & Bao, Y. (2020). Impact of “e-Learning crack-up” perception on psychological distress among college students during COVID-19 pandemic: A mediating role of “fear of academic year loss.” Children and Youth Services Review, 118, Article 105355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105355
  23. Henrie, C. R., Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2015). Measuring student engagement in technology-mediated learning: A review. Computers & Education, 90, 36-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.005
  24. Herodotou, C., Maguire, C., McDowell, N., Hlosta, M., & Boroowa, A. (2021). The engagement of university teachers with predictive learning analytics. Computers & Education, 173, Article 104285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104285
  25. Huang, Y., & Wang, S. (2023). How to motivate student engagement in emergency online learning? Evidence from the COVID-19 situation. Higher Education, 85, 1101-1123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00880-2
  26. Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática [INEI] (2022). Acceso y uso de tecnologías en educación superior en el Perú [Access to and use of technologies in higher education in Peru]. National Institute of Statistics and Informatics. https://www.inei.gob.pe/media/MenuRecursivo/boletines/boletin_tic.pdf
  27. Johar, N. A., Kew, S. N., Tasir, Z., & Koh, E. (2023). Learning analytics on student engagement to enhance students’ learning performance: A systematic review. Sustainability, 15(10), Article 7849. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107849
  28. Jung, Y., & Wise, A. F. (2025). How students engage with learning analytics: Access, action-taking, and learning routines with message-based information to support collaborative annotation. Computers & Education, 232, Article 105280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105280
  29. Kannan, V., Kuromiya, H., Gouripeddi, S., Majumdar, R., Warriem, J., & Ogata, H. (2020). Flip & pair–A strategy to augment a blended course with active-learning components: Effects on engagement and learning. Smart Learning Environments, 7, Article 34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-020-00138-3
  30. Kebritchi, M., Lipschuetz, A., & Santiague, L. (2017). Issues and challenges for teaching successful online courses in higher education: A literature review. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 46(1), 4-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239516661713
  31. Korsah, D. P. (2024). Adoption and utilization of Moodle learning management system for emergency remote teaching: A UTAUT perspective. Educational Point, 1(2), Article e111. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/15730
  32. Larrabee Sønderlund, A., Hughes, E., & Smith, J. (2019). The efficacy of learning analytics interventions in higher education: A systematic review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2594-2618. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12720
  33. Lee, J., & Kim, D. (2025). From awareness to empowerment: Self-determination theory-informed learning analytics dashboards to enhance student engagement in asynchronous online courses. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 37, 1078-1118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-024-09416-2
  34. Lee, J.-E., & Recker, M. (2021). The effects of instructors’ use of online discussions strategies on student participation and performance in university online introductory mathematics courses. Computers & Education, 162, Article 104084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104084
  35. Li, T., Fan, Y., Tan, Y., Wang, Y., Singh, S., Li, X., Rakovic, M., van der Graf, J., Lim, L., Yang, B., Molenaar, I., Bannert, M., Moore, J., Swiecki, Z., Tsai, Y.-S., Shaffer, D. W., & Gasevic, D. (2023). Analytics of self-regulated learning scaffolding: Effects on learning processes. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1206696. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1206696
  36. Li, Y., Hew, K. F., & Du, J. (2024). Gamification enhances student intrinsic motivation, perceptions of autonomy and relatedness, but minimal impact on competency: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72, 765-796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10337-7
  37. Lin, L., King, R. B., Fu, L., & Leung, S. O. (2024). Information and communication technology engagement and digital reading: How meta-cognitive strategies impact their relationship. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(1), 277-296. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13355
  38. Linden, K., van der Ploeg, N., & Roman, N. (2023). Explainable learning analytics to identify disengaged students early in semester: An intervention supporting widening participation. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 45(6), 626-640. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2023.2212418
  39. Machuca-Vílchez, J. A., Ramos-Cavero, M. J., & Cordova-Buiza, F. (2023). Knowledge management in financial education in Peruvian government programs focused on women: Progress and challenges. Knowledge and Performance Management, 7(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.21511/kpm.07(1).2023.01
  40. Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning, 22(1), 205-222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
  41. Navarro-Ibarra, L., Cuevas-Salazar, O., & Robles-Aguilar, A. (2023). Knowledge gaps in education and ICT: A literature review in open access publications. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), Article ep480. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13770
  42. OECD. (2022). Education at a glance: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/3197152b-en
  43. Rets, I., Herodotou, C., Bayer, V., Hlosta, M., & Rienties, B. (2021). Exploring critical factors of the perceived usefulness of a learning analytics dashboard for distance university students. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18, Article 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00284-9
  44. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
  45. Sailer, M., & Homner, L. (2020). The gamification of learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32(1), 77-112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w
  46. Sakhieva, R. G., Grishnova, E. E., Zhukova, M. A., Sokolova, E. G., Lapidus, N. I., & Khlusyanov, O. V. (2025). Use and adoption of ICTs oriented to university student learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(4), Article ep604. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/17429
  47. Salazar-Rebaza, C., Zegarra-Alva, M., & Cordova-Buiza, F. (2023). Academic management of university virtual education: An analysis from the perception of students, teachers, and managers. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 21(4), 532-544. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.21(4).2023.40
  48. Salazar-Rebaza, C., Zegarra-Alva, M., Cordova-Buiza, F. (2022). Management and leadership in university education: Approaches and perspectives. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 20(3), 130-141. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.20(3).2022.11
  49. Sánchez, R. A., & Hueros, A. D. (2010). Motivational factors that influence the acceptance of Moodle using TAM. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1632-1640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.011
  50. Sanhueza, M., Sandoval, L., Ormazabal, M., & Zúñiga, M. (2025). Effect of a teacher training program with ICT on university students’ learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(1), Article ep556. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15745
  51. Schindler, L. A., Burkholder, G. J., Morad, O. A., & Marsh, C. (2017). Computer-based technology and student engagement: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 4(1), Article 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0063-0
  52. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
  53. Tepgec, M., Heil, J., & Ifenthaler, D. (2025). Feedback literacy matters: Unlocking the potential of learning analytics-based feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 50(1), 50-66. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2367587
  54. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
  55. Wang, F., Yin, H., & King, R. B. (2025). Profiling motivation and engagement in online learning: A multilevel latent profile analysis of students and institutions. Computers & Education, 227, Article 105209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105209
  56. Zegarra-Alva, M., Castañeda-Gil, Y., & Cordova-Buiza, F. (2024). Evaluation of specific competencies of university students in hospitality and gastronomy programs. Knowledge and Performance Management, 8(1), 149-162. https://doi.org/10.21511/kpm.08(1).2024.11