Research Article

Teachers’ digital competence in the post COVID-19 era: The effects of digital nativeness, and digital leadership capital

Nazir Ahmed Jogezai 1 * , Diana Koroleva 1 , Fozia Ahmed Baloch 2
More Detail
1 Laboratory for Educational Innovation Research, Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, RUSSIA2 Department of Education, Balochistan University of Information Technology, Engineering and Management Sciences (BUITEMS), Quetta, PAKISTAN* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), October 2023, ep466, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13620
Published Online: 28 August 2023, Published: 01 October 2023
OPEN ACCESS   1801 Views   1276 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic, which posed challenges for accommodating student learning, also opened avenues for using digital resources in online learning. However, differences were observed in their use, effectiveness, and intensity across developed and least developed societies. This is referred to as “digital inequalities,” caused by factors such as insufficient organizational-level support and teachers’ digital competence (DC). This study was conducted to determine teachers’ DC and reveal if their DC was explained by their digital nativeness and principals’ digital instructional leadership capital. The study used a quantitative research method, whereby data were collected from 393 teachers. The researchers used SmartPLS 4 and SPSS 24 to analyze data. The findings complement the available literature and help pave ways to promote the integration of digital resources in teaching and learning.
Keywords: digital nativeness, digital competence, digital inclusion, digital instructional leadership, COVID-19 pandemic, teacher

CITATION (APA)

Jogezai, N. A., Koroleva, D., & Baloch, F. A. (2023). Teachers’ digital competence in the post COVID-19 era: The effects of digital nativeness, and digital leadership capital. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(4), ep466. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13620

REFERENCES

  1. Adnan, M., & Anwar, K. (2020). Online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic: Students perspectives. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 1(2), 45-51. https://doi.org/10.33902/jpsp.2020261309
  2. Ainley, J., Enger, L., & Searle, D. (2008). Students in a digital age: Implications of ICT for teaching and learning. In I. J. Voogt, & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 63-80). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-73315-9_4
  3. Alberta Teachers’ Association. (2020). Compassion fatigue, emotional labor and educator burnout: Research study phase one report. https://www.teachers.ab.ca/SiteCollectionDocuments/ATA/Publications/Research/COOR-101-30 Compassion Fatigue Study.pdf
  4. Baloch, F. A., Mohamed Ismail, S. A. M., & Jogezai, N. A. (2022). Predictability of school principals’ leadership orientation for their intentions of implementing nutrition education. International Journal of Educational Reform, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879221121658
  5. Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x
  6. Berkovich, I., & Hassan, T. (2022). Principals’ digital instructional leadership during the pandemic: Impact on teachers’ intrinsic motivation and students’ learning. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221113411
  7. Blau, I., & Presser, O. (2013). E-Leadership of school principals: Increasing school effectiveness by a school data management system. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(6), 1000-1011. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12088
  8. Borg, K., & Smith, L. (2018). Digital inclusion and online behavior: Five typologies of Australian internet users. Behavior & Information Technology, 37(4), 367-380. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1436593
  9. Calvani, A., Fini, A., Ranieri, M., & Picci, P. (2012). Are young generations in secondary school digitally competent? A study on Italian teenagers. Computers & Education, 58, 797-807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.004
  10. Carretero, S., Vuorikari. R., & Punie, Y. (2017). DigComp 2.1: The digital competence framework for citizens with eight proficiency levels and examples of use. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC106281
  11. Cassidy, S., & Eachus, P. (2002). Developing the computer user self-efficacy (CUSE) scale: Investigating the relationship between computer self-efficacy, gender and experience with computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(2), 133-153. https://doi.org/10.2190/JGJR-0KVL-HRF7-GCNV
  12. Cattaneo, A.A.P., Antonietti, C., & Rauseo, M. (2021). How digitalized are vocational teachers? Assessing digital competence in vocational education and looking at its underlying factors. Computer and Education, 176, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104358
  13. Chadwick, D., Ågren, K. A., Caton, S., Chiner, E., Danker, J., Gómez-Puerta, M., Heitplatz, V., Johansson, S., Normand, C. L., Murphy, E., Plichta, P., Strnadová, I., & Wallén, E. F. (2022). Digital inclusion and participation of people with intellectual disabilities during COVID-19: A rapid review and international bricolage. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 19(3), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1111/jppi.12410
  14. Chen, X., Shu, D., & Zhu, Y. (2021). Investigating in-service foreign language teachers’ beliefs about using information and communication technology. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30(1), 59-70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-020-00514-0
  15. Collins, B. (2003). Moments and cumulants of polynomial random variables on unitary groups, the itzykson-zuber integral, and free probability. International Mathematics Research Notices, 2003(17), 953-982.
  16. Cook, H., Apps, T., Beckman, K., & Bennett, S. (2023). Digital competence for emergency remote teaching in higher education: Understanding the present and anticipating the future. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71(1), 7-32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10194-4
  17. Cucinotta, D., & Vanelli, M. (2020). WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic. Acta Biomedica, 91(1), 157-160. https://doi.org/10.23750/abm.v91i1.9397
  18. De Giusti, A. (2020). Policy brief: Education during COVID-19 and beyond. Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnología En Educación y Educación En Tecnología [Ibero-American Magazine of Technology in Education and Education in Technology], 26, 110-111. https://doi.org/10.24215/18509959.26.e12
  19. ECLAC-UNESCO. (2020). COVID-19 education in the time of COVID-19 report. https://www.cepal.org/en/publications/45905-education-time-covid-19
  20. Erstad, O. (2006). A new direction? Digital literacy, student participation and curriculum reform in Norway. Education & Information Technologies, 11, 415-429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-006-9008-2
  21. Erstad, O. (2010). Educating the digital generation. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 1, 56-70. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1891-943X-2010-01-05
  22. Eshet-Alkalay, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13, 93-106.
  23. Ferrari, A. (2012). Digital competence in practice: An analysis of frameworks. https://ifap.ru/library/book522.pdf
  24. Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., & Gebhardt, E. (2014). Preparing for life in a digital age: The IEA international computer and information literacy study international report. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14222-7
  25. Gardner, D. G., Dukes, R. L., & Discenza, R. (1993). Computer use, self-confidence and attitudes: A causal analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 9(3), 427-440. https://doi.org/10.1016/0747-5632(93)90033-O
  26. Göbel, K., Neuber, K., Lion, C., & Cukierman, U. (2023). Self-efficacy in online teaching during the immediate transition from conventional to online teaching in German and Argentinian universities-the relevance of institutional support and individual characteristics. Education Sciences, 13(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13010076
  27. Gruszczynska, A., & Pountney, R. (2013). Developing the concept of digital literacy in the context of schools and teacher education. Enhancing Learning in the Social Sciences, 5(1), 25-36. https://10.11120/elss.2013.05010025
  28. Gu, X., Zhu, Y., & Guo, X. (2013). Meeting the “digital natives”: Understanding the acceptance of technology in classrooms. Educational Technology and Society, 16(1), 392-402.
  29. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
  30. Harrison, C. (2018). Defining and seeking to identify critical Internet literacy: A discourse analysis of fifth graders’ Internet search and evaluation activity. Literacy, 52(3), 153-160. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12136
  31. Hatleik, O. E., & Christophersen, K. (2012). Digital competence at the beginning of upper secondary school: Identifying factors explaining digital inclusion. Computer and Education, 63, 240-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.015
  32. Hatlevik, O. E., & Christophersen, K. A. (2013). Digital competence at the beginning of upper secondary school: Identifying factors explaining digital inclusion. Computers and Education, 63, 240-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.015
  33. Henseler, J. (2017). Bridging design and behavioral research with variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of Advertising, 46(1), 178-192. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2017.1281780
  34. Huang, F., Teo, T., & He, J. (2021). Digital nativity of university teachers in China: Factor structure and measurement invariance of the digital native assessment scale (DNAS). Interactive Learning Environments, 29(3), 385-399. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1570278
  35. Hürsen, C. (2012). Determine the attitudes of teachers towards professional development activities. Procedia Technology, 1, 420-425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2012.02.094
  36. Ilomäki, L., Paavola, S., Lakkala, M., & Kantosalo, A. (2016). Digital competence-an emergent boundary concept for policy and educational research. Education and Information Technologies, 21, 655-679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9346-4
  37. Iivari, N., Sharma, S., & Ventä-Olkkonen, L. (2020). Digital transformation of everyday life–how COVID-19 pandemic transformed the basic education of the young generation and why information management research should care? International Journal of Information Management, 55, 102183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102183
  38. Instefjord, E. J., & Munthe, E. (2017). Educating digitally competent teachers: A study of integration of professional digital competence in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 37-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.05.016
  39. Ismail, S. A. M. M., Jogezai, N. A., & Baloch, F. A. (2020). Hindering and enabling factors towards ICT integration in schools: A developing country perspective. Elementary Education Online, 19(3), 1537-1547. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2020.733176
  40. Jenkins, G. (2020). Teacher agency: The effects of active and passive responses to curriculum change. Australian Educational Researcher, 47(1), 167-181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-019-00334-2
  41. Jogezai, N. A., Baloch, F. A., Jaffar, M., Shah, T., Khilji, G. K., & Bashir, S. (2021). Teachers’ attitudes towards social media (SM) use in online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic: The effects of SM use by teachers and religious scholars during physical distancing. Heliyon, 7(4), e06781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06781
  42. Jogezai, N. A., Ismail. S. A. M. M., & Baloch, F. A. (2022). Head teachers’ change facilitation styles and teachers’ concerns about ICT integration. Management in Education, 36(2), 82-93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020620932365
  43. Khairani, A. Z. (2017). Assessing urban and rural teachers’ competencies in STEM integrated education in Malaysia. MATEC Web of Conferences, 87, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20178704004
  44. Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 135-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001
  45. Lateef, A. R., & Alaba, S. O. (2013). Influence of gender and attitude of pre-service teachers towards online instruction in a selected university in South-Western Nigeria. Asian Social Science, 9(4), 84. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n4p84
  46. Liu, S., & Hallinger, P. (2018). Principal instructional leadership, teacher self-efficacy, and teacher professional learning in China: Testing a mediated-effects model. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(4), 501-528. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X18769048
  47. Mannila, L., Nordén, L. Å., & Pears, A. (2018). Digital competence, teacher self-efficacy and training needs. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 78-85). https://doi.org/10.1145/3230977.3230993
  48. Mariën, I., & Prodnik, J. (2014). Digital inclusion and user (dis)empowerment: A critical perspective. Info, 16(6), 35-47. https://doi.org/10.1108/info-07-2014-0030
  49. Marusic, T., & Viskovic, I. (2018). ICT competencies of students. Correction of the Journal Itro, 115(56), 13.
  50. Nair, I., & Das, V. M. (2012). Using technology acceptance model to assess teachers’ attitude towards use of technology as teaching tool: A SEM approach. International Journal of Computer Applications, 42(2), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.5120/5661-7691
  51. Oberer, B., & Erkollar, A. (2018). Leadership 4.0: Digital leaders in the age of industry 4.0. International Journal of Organizational Leadership, 7(4), 404-412. https://doi.org/10.33844/ijol.2018.60332
  52. Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Educating the Net generation, an Educause e-book publication. http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen
  53. OECD. (2020). COVID-19: Global action. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/en/policy-responses
  54. Olofssona, A. D., Franssonb, G., & Lindberg, J. O. (2020). A study of the use of digital technology and its conditions with a view to understanding what ‘adequate digital competence’ may mean in a national policy initiative. Educational Studies, 46(6), 727-743. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2019.1651694
  55. Papp, R. (1998). Student perception & knowledge about information technology: A computer attitude and experience survey to measure changes. Journal of Education for Management Information Systems, 5(1), 54-62.
  56. Pettersson, F. (2018). On the issues of digital competence in educational contexts – a review of literature. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 1005-1021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9649-3
  57. Pireddu, M. (2014). Social learning. Le forme comunicative dell’apprendimento [The communicative forms of learning]. Guerini e Associati.
  58. Pollock, K. (2020). School leaders’ work during the COVID-19 pandemic: A two-pronged approach. International Studies in Educational Administration, 48(3), 38-44.
  59. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital native, digital immigrant part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 2-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
  60. Quaicoe, J. S., & Pata, K. (2020). Teachers’ digital literacy and digital activity as digital divide components among basic schools in Ghana. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 4077-4095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10158-8
  61. Reisdorf, B., & Rhinesmith, C. (2020). Digital inclusion as a core component of social inclusion. Social Inclusion, 8(2), 132-137. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v8i2.3184
  62. Saavedra, A. R., & Opfer, V. D. (2012). Learning 21st-century skills requires 21st-century teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 8-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171209400203
  63. Samms, G. (2020). As cities face COVID-19, the digital divide becomes more acute. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/pikeresearch/2020/04/02/as-cities-face-covid-19-the-digitaldivide-becomes-more-acute/#41e9beda58c5
  64. Sangwan, A., Sangwan, A., & Punia, P. (2021). Development and validation of an attitude scale towards online teaching and learning for higher education teachers. Tech Trends, 65(2), 187-195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00561-w
  65. Scull, J., Phillips, M., Sharma, U., & Garnier, K. (2020). Innovations in teacher education at the time of COVID19: An Australian perspective. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(4), 497-506. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1802701
  66. Shank, G., & Brown, L. (2013). Exploring educational research literacy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203943786
  67. Sharpe, R., Bennett, S., & Varga-Atkins, T. (2022). Introduction to the handbook of digital higher education. In R. Sharpe, S. Bennett, & T. Varga-Atkins (Eds.), Handbook of digital higher education (pp. 1-12). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800888494.00009
  68. Steen, T., & Brandsen, T. (2020). Coproduction during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: Will it last? Willey Online Library, 80(5), 851-855. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13258
  69. Teo, T. (2013). An initial development and validation of a digital natives assessment scale (DNAS). Computers & Education, 67, 51-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.012
  70. Thoonen, E. E., Sleegers, P. J., Peetsma, T. T., & Oort, F. J. (2010). Can teachers motivate students to learn? Educational Studies, 37(3), 345-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2010.507008
  71. Tsai, M. J. (2002). Do male students often perform better than female students when learning computers? A study of Taiwanese eighth graders’ computer education through strategic and cooperative learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(1), 67-85. https://doi.org/10.2190/9JW6-VV1P-FAX8-CGE0
  72. Tzafilkou, K., Perifanou, M., & Economides, A. A. (2022). Development and validation of students’ digital competence scale (SDiCoS). International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(30), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00330-0
  73. Walton, P., Kop, T., Spriggs, D., & Fitzgerald, B. (2013). A digital inclusion: Empowering all Australians. Australian Journal of Telecommunications and the Digital Economy, 1(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.7790/ajtde.v1n1.9
  74. Wang, P. Y. (2013). Examining the digital divide between rural and urban schools: Technology availability, teachers’ integration level and students’ perception. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 2(2), 127-139. https://doi.org/10.5430/jct.v2n2p127
  75. Xie, Q. (2022). The factors influencing Chinese university teachers’ intentions for using the micro-lecture in the post COVID-19 era. International Journal of Environment Research and Public Health, 19, 14887. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192214887
  76. Yang Hansen, K., Radišić, J., Liu, X., & Glassow, L.N. (2020). Exploring diversity in the relationships between teacher quality and job satisfaction in the Nordic countries–insights from TALIS 2013 and 2018. In T. S., Frønes, A. Pettersen, J. Radišić, & N. Buchholtz (Eds.), Equity, equality and diversity in the Nordic model of education (pp. 99-137). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61648-9_5
  77. Zhang, Y., Zhu, Y., Bai, Q. Y., Li, X. Y., & Zhu, Y. H. (2016). Research of the teaching interaction behavior characteristics of primary mathematics in the smart classroom. China Educational Technologies, 353, 43-48.
  78. Zhao, Y., Pinto Llorente, A. M., & Sánchez Gómez, M. C. (2021). Digital competence in higher education research: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 168, 104212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104212
  79. Zhong, Z. J. (2011). From access to usage: The divide of self-reported digital skills among adolescents. Computers & Education, 56(3), 736-746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.016
  80. Zurkowski, P. G. (1974). The information service environment relationships and priorities. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED100391.pdf