Research Article

The Impact of Digital Literacy and Social Presence on Teachers’ Acceptance of Online Professional Development

Mailizar Mailizar 1 * , Khairul Umam 1 , Elisa Elisa 2
More Detail
1 Mathematics Education Department, Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh, INDONESIA2 Physics Education Department, Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh, INDONESIA* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(4), October 2022, ep384, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12329
Published: 10 August 2022
OPEN ACCESS   3190 Views   2029 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The global COVID-19 pandemic has created the urgent need for online instruction throughout all levels, including teacher professional development. As we move beyond the survival phase of remote teacher professional development, it is critical to well understand teacher acceptance and continued use of online professional development. Digital literacy and social presence (SP) have been widely studied to understand online teaching and learning process. However, there is a dearth of studies that examine the impact of digital literacy and SP on the acceptance of online teacher professional development (OTPD). This study aimed to examine if digital literacy and SP affected secondary school teachers’ acceptance and continued use of OTPD. A quantitative method was employed with two hundred and thirty-two Indonesian secondary school teachers completed a 48-item questionnaire based on an extended technology acceptance model and teacher digital literacy framework. Data were analyzed by structural equation modeling. The findings showed that digital literacy and SP significantly affected teachers’ acceptance of OTPD. Therefore, this study suggests that the proposed model is valid to explain teachers’ engagement in OTPD. The results have implications for educational leaders, designers, and facilitators who want to promote online professional development.
Keywords: OTPD, digital literacy, SP, acceptance of OTPD

CITATION (APA)

Mailizar, M., Umam, K., & Elisa, E. (2022). The Impact of Digital Literacy and Social Presence on Teachers’ Acceptance of Online Professional Development. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(4), ep384. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12329

REFERENCES

  1. Bragg, L., Walsh, C., & Heyeres, M. (2021). Successful design and delivery of online professional development for teachers: A systematic review of the literature. Computers & Education, 104158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104158
  2. 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
  3. Dede, C. (Ed.). (2006). Online professional development for teachers: Emerging models and methods. Harvard Education Press.
  4. Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181-199. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X08331140
  5. Elliott, J. C. (2017). The evolution from traditional to online professional development: A review. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33(3), 114-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2017.1305304
  6. Eshet-Alkalai, Y., & Chajut, E. (2009). Changes over time in digital literacy. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(6), 713-715. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2008.0264
  7. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). Helping novices learn to teach: Lessons from an exemplary support teacher. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 17-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487101052001003
  8. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education. MacGraw-Hill.
  9. Garrison, D. R. (2011). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. Routledge.
  10. Gie, T. A., & Fenn, C. J. (2019). Technology acceptance model and digital literacy of first-year students in a private institution of higher learning in Malaysia. BERJAYA Journal of Services & Management, 11, 103-116.
  11. Gunawardena, C. N. (2017). Social presence in online learning: Multiple perspectives on practice and research. Stylus Publishing, LLC.
  12. Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649709526970
  13. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE.
  14. Hussein, Z. (2017). Leading to intention: The role of attitude in relation to technology acceptance model in e-learning. Procedia Computer Science, 105, 159-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.01.196
  15. Jones, R., & Hafner, C. (2012). Understanding digital literacies: A practical introduction. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203095317
  16. Karchmer-Klein, R., & Pytash, K. E. (2019). Effective practices in online teacher preparation for literacy educators. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-0206-8
  17. Lee, S.-M. (2014). The relationships between higher order thinking skills, cognitive density, and social presence in online learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 41-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.12.002
  18. Letchumanan, M., & Tarmizi, R. (2011). Assessing the intention to use e-book among engineering undergraduates in Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia. Library Hi Tech, 29(3), 512-528. https://doi.org/10.1108/07378831111174459
  19. List, A., Brante, E. W., & Klee, H. L. (2020). A framework of pre-service teachers’ conceptions about digital literacy: Comparing the United States and Sweden. Computers & Education, 148, 103788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103788
  20. Liu, I.-F., Chen, M. C., Sun, Y. S., Wible, D., & Kuo, C.-H. (2010). Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Computers & Education, 54(2), 600-610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.009
  21. Lowenthal, P. R., & Dunlap, J. C. (2020). Social presence and online discussions: a mixed method investigation. Distance Education, 41(4), 490-514. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1821603
  22. Mailizar, M., Almanthari, A., & Maulina, S. (2021a). Examining teachers’ behavioral intention to use e-learning in teaching of mathematics: An extended TAM model. Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(2), ep298. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/9709
  23. Mailizar, M., Hidayat, M., & Al-Manthari, A. (2021b). Examining the impact of mathematics teachers’ TPACK on their acceptance of online professional development. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 37(3), 196-212. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2021.1934613
  24. Mailizar, M., Samingan, S., Rusman, R., Huda, I., & Yulisman, H. (2020). Mathematics, science and social science teachers’ acceptance of online teacher professional development: Does internet accessibility matter? Journal of Physics Conference Series, 1460, 012103. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1460/1/012103
  25. McArthur, T., Lam-McArthur, J., & Fontaine, L. (2018). Digital literacy. In T. McArthur, J. Lam-McArthur, & L. Fontaine (Eds.), The Oxford companion to the English language. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acref/9780199661282.001.0001
  26. Mills, S. C. (2006). Using the internet for active teaching and learning. Prentice Hall.
  27. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810610800610
  28. Nazzal, A., Thoyib, A., Zain, D., & Hussein, A. S. (2021). The influence of digital literacy and demographic characteristics on online shopping intention: An empirical study in Palestine. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(8), 205-215.
  29. Ng, W. (2012). Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education, 59(3), 1065-1078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.04.016
  30. OECD. (2015). Students, computers, and learning: Making the connection. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en
  31. Omar, N., & Hashim, H. (2021). A survey on the acceptance of e-learning for professional development amongst English as a second language (ESL) teachers in Malaysia. Creative Education, 12(5), 1027-1039. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2021.125075
  32. Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003117407
  33. Peñarroja, V., Sánchez, J., Gamero, N., Orengo, V., & Zornoza, A. M. (2019). The influence of organisational facilitating conditions and technology acceptance factors on the effectiveness of virtual communities of practice. Behaviour & Information Technology, 38(8), 845-857. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1564070
  34. Peterson, E., & Alexander, P. A. (2020). Navigating print and digital sources: Students’ selection, use, and integration of multiple sources across mediums. The Journal of Experimental Education, 88(1), 27-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2018.1496058
  35. Reimers, F., Schleicher, A., Saavedra, J., & Tuominen, S. (2020). Supporting the continuation of teaching and learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. OECD, 1(1), 1-38.
  36. Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009
  37. Shank, G., & Brown, L. (2013). Exploring educational research literacy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203943786
  38. Sharma, S. K., & Chandel, J. K. (2013). Technology acceptance model for the use of learning through websites among students in Oman. International Arab Journal of E-Technology, 3(1), 44-49.
  39. Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. Wiley.
  40. Singer, L. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2017). Reading on paper and digitally: What the past decades of empirical research reveal. Review of Educational Research, 87(6), 1007-1041. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317722961
  41. Smith, J. A., & Sivo, S. A. (2012). Predicting continued use of online teacher professional development and the influence of social presence and sociability. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6), 871-882. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01223.x
  42. Taat, M. S., & Francis, A. (2020). Factors influencing the students’ acceptance of e-learning at teacher education institute: An exploratory study in Malaysia. International Journal of Higher Education, 9(1), 133-141. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v9n1p133
  43. Thompson, P. (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers & Education, 65, 12-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.022
  44. Toquero, C. M., & Talidong, K. J. (2020). Webinar technology: Developing teacher training programs for emergency remote teaching amid COVID-19. Interdisciplinary Journal of Virtual Learning in Medical Sciences, 11(3), 200-203.
  45. Trikoilis, D., & Papanastasiou, E. C. (2020). The potential of research for professional development in isolated settings during the covid-19 crisis and beyond. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 295-300.
  46. Virkus, S. (2003). Information literacy in Europe: A literature. Information Research, 8(4), 1-56.
  47. Yurkofsky, M. M., Blum-Smith, S., & Brennan, K. (2019). Expanding outcomes: Exploring varied conceptions of teacher learning in an online professional development experience. Teaching and Teacher Education, 82, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.03.002