Research Article

TPACK-SAMR digital literacy competence, technostress, and teaching performance: Correlational study among EFL lecturers

Afif Ikhwanul Muslimin 1 2 * , Nur Mukminatien 1 , Francisca Maria Ivone 1
More Detail
1 Universitas Negeri Malang, East Java, INDONESIA2 Universitas Islam Negeri Mataram, NTB, INDONESIA* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(2), April 2023, ep409, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12921
Published Online: 31 January 2023, Published: 01 April 2023
OPEN ACCESS   3071 Views   2025 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to scrutinize the correlation between English as a foreign language (EFL) lecturers’ digital literacy competence (DLC) based on the TPACK-SAMR framework and their technostress. In addition, this study revealed how the variables correlated to the lecturers’ EFL teaching performances. Therefore, a correlational design with a descriptive explanation model was conducted. The participants were six EFL lecturers from six different universities in various cities in East Java Province, Indonesia. The data were collected by administering TPACK-SAMR DLC and technostress questionnaires, conducting a semi-structured interview, and documenting the teaching scenarios. The results showed that most participants were more confident with their pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge. They claimed it was hard to mingle them into harmonious teaching performances with technology that challenged them to achieve the higher TPACK-SAMR DLC level. Relevant to this finding, their DLC had a negative ‘very high’ correlation with technostress, shown by -.824 Pearson correlation coefficient. Henceforth, their EFL teaching performances reflected the minimum operation of technology, according to SAMR stages, to mediate EFL teaching by substituting and augmenting the technology. Therefore, this study highlights the importance of DLC training to escalate the positive outcomes of EFL teaching with technology and minimize technostress.
Keywords: digital literacy competence, EFL, TPACK-SAMR, teaching performance, technostress

CITATION (APA)

Muslimin, A. I., Mukminatien, N., & Ivone, F. M. (2023). TPACK-SAMR digital literacy competence, technostress, and teaching performance: Correlational study among EFL lecturers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(2), ep409. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12921

REFERENCES

  1. Altinay, F., Dagli, G., & Altinay, Z. (2016). The role of information technology in becoming learning organization. Procedia Computer Science, 102(2016), 663-667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.09.459
  2. Antonietti, C., Cattaneo, A., & Amenduni, F. (2022). Can teachers’ digital competence influence technology acceptance in vocational education? Computers in Human Behavior, 132, 107266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107266
  3. Apostu, S. A., Mukli, L., Panait, M., Gigauri, I., & Hysa, E. (2022). Economic growth through the lenses of education, entrepreneurship, and innovation. Administrative Sciences, 12(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci12030074
  4. Apriliyanti, D. L. (2020). Enhancing teachers’ competencies through professional development program: Challenges and benefactions. Acuity Journal of English Language Pedagogy Literature and Culture, 5(1), 28-38. https://doi.org/10.35974/acuity.v5i1.2042
  5. Arifin, W. L. (2017). Psychological problems and challenges in EFL speaking classroom. Register Journal, 10(1), 29-40. https://doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v10i1.874
  6. Baharuddin. (2021). The effect of working environment on the teacher performance. Lentera Pendidikan: Jurnal Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan [Education Lantern: Journal of Tarbiyah and Teacher Training], 24(1), 122-130. https://doi.org/10.24252/lp.2021v24n1i12.
  7. Bahri, A., Jamalludin, A. B., Arifin, A. N., & Saparuddin. (2022). Students’ and teachers’ digital literacy skill: A comparative study between schools, classes, and genders in urban and rural areas. International Journal of Science and Research, 11(2), 184-191. https://doi.org/10.21275/SR22130101519
  8. BPS Jawa Timur. (2022). PDRB perkapita atas dasar harga berlaku menurut kabupaten/kota (Ribu Rupiah), 2019-2021 [GRDP per capita based on current prices by regency/city (Thousand Rupiah), 2019-2021]. https://jatim.bps.go.id/indicator/162/327/1/pdrb-perkapita-adhb.html
  9. Cherner, T., & Mitchell, C. (2020). Deconstructing EdTech frameworks based on their creators, features, and usefulness. Learning Media and Technology, 46(3), 91-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1773852
  10. Chung, M., & Harris, P. R. (2018). Jealousy as a specific emotion: The dynamic functional model. Emotion Review, 10(2),175407391879525. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073918795257
  11. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. SAGE.
  12. Drugova, E., Zhuravleva, I., Aiusheeva, M., & Grits, D. (2021). Toward a model of learning innovation integration: TPACK-SAMR based analysis of the introduction of a digital learning environment in three Russian universities. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 4925-4942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10514-2
  13. Falloon, G. (2020). From digital literacy to digital competence: The teacher digital competency (TDC) framework. Education Technology Research Development, 68(1), 2449-2472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09767-4
  14. Fauzan, F., Arifin, F., Lubis, M. A., & Firdaus, F. M., (2022). Lecturer’s digital literacy ability in the pandemic. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science, 17(4), 1130-1142. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i4.7122
  15. Fouad, N. S. (2021). Securing higher education against cyber threats: From an institutional risk to a national policy challenge. Journal of Cyber Policy, 6(2), 137-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/23738871.2021.1973526
  16. Gabby, S., Avargil, S., Herscovitz, O., & Dori, Y. J. (2017). The case of middle and high school chemistry teachers implementing technology: Using the concerns-based adoption model to assess change processes. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(1), 214-232. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00193A
  17. Golz, C., Peter, K. A., Muller, T. J., Muschler, J., Zwakhalen, S. M. G., & Hahn, S. (2021). Technostress and digital competence among health professionals in Swiss psychiatric hospitals: Cross-sectional study. JMIR Mental Health, 8(1), e31408. https://doi.org/10.2196/31408
  18. Hassan, M. M., & Mirza, T. (2021). The digital literacy in teachers of the schools of Rajouri (J&K)-India: Teacher’s perspective. International Journal of Education and Management Engineering, 11(1), 28-40. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijeme.2021.01.04
  19. Hendartono, A., & Widilestari, C. (2022). Model hubungan technostress terhadap emotional exhaustion pada mahasiswa perguruan tinggi maritim selama pembelajaran online [Model of the relationship between technostress and emotional exhaustion in maritime college students during online learning]. Jurnal Saintek Maritim [Journal of Maritime Science], 23(1), 1-14. https://jurnal.unimar-amni.ac.id/index.php/JSTM/article/view/325
  20. Iskandar, I., Sumarni, S., Dewanti, R., & Asnur, M. N. A. (2022). Infusing digital literacy in authentic academic digital practices of English language teaching at universities. International Journal of Language Education, 6(1), 75-90. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v6i1.31574
  21. Jalongo, M. R. (2021). The effects of COVID-19 on early childhood education and care: Research and resources for children, families, teachers, and teacher educators. Early Children Education Journal, 49, 763-774. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-021-01208-y
  22. Jamison, D. W., & Jansen, C. (2021). Technology transfer and economic growth. Industry and Higher Education, 15(3), 189-196. https://doi.org/10.5367/000000001101295650
  23. Keskin, N. O., Ozata, F. Z., & Banar, K. (2015). Examining digital literacy competences and learning habits of open and distance learners. Contemporary Educational Technology, 6(1), 74-90. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6140
  24. Khan, A., Shah, I. M., Khan, S., & Gul, S. (2012). Teachers’ stress, performance & resources the moderating effects of resources on stress & performance. International Review of Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(2), 21-29. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236141643_Teachers'_Stress_Performance_Resources_The_Moderating_Effects_of_Resources_on_Stress_Performance
  25. Khlaif, Z.N., Sanmugam, M., & Joma, A.I. (2022). Factors influencing teacher’s technostress experienced in using emerging technology: A qualitative study. Technology, Knowledge, and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-022-09607-9
  26. Kim, D. G., & Lee, C. W. (2021). Exploring the roles of self-efficacy and technical support in the relationship between techno-stress and counter-productivity. Sustainability, 13(8), 4349. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084349
  27. Ladyanna, S., & Aslinda. (2020). Problems and challenges of online lectures in Indonesia during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Educational Development and Quality Assurance (pp. 78-83). https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210202.016
  28. Lee, Y.-K. (2021). Impacts of digital technostress and digital technology self-efficacy on fintech usage intention of Chinese gen z consumers. Sustainability, 13(9), 5077. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095077
  29. Li, M., & Yu, Z. (2022). Teachers’ satisfaction, role, and digital literacy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability, 14(3), 1121. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031121
  30. Li, S., Liu, Y., & Su, Y.-S. (2022). Differential analysis of teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) abilities according to teaching stages and educational levels. Sustainability, 14(12), 7176. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127176
  31. 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
  32. Meghanathan, J. (2016). Assortative analysis of real-world network graphs based on centrality metrics. Computer and Information Science, 9(3), 7-25. https://doi.org/10.5539/cis.v9n3p7
  33. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
  34. Muktiarni. (2021). Integration of the SAMR learning model in vocational education. Media Pendidikan Gizi dan Kuliner [Nutrition and Culinary Education Media], 10(1), 83-88. https://doi.org/10.%2017509/xxxxt.vxix
  35. Muslimin, A. I., Mukminatien, N., & Ivone, F. M. (2022). The effect of technology-based instruction lesson plan on EFL pre-service teachers’ TPACK self-efficacy. World Journal of English Language, 12(6), 304-314. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v12n6p304
  36. Nadia, A. (2020). An analysis of teacher competence in teaching-learning process of English at SMAIT Iqra’ Kota Bengkulu [Thesis, IAIN Bengkulu]. http://repository.iainbengkulu.ac.id/4398/1/skripsi%20annisa%20pdf.pdf
  37. Pratiwi, D., Susilo, H., & Rohman, F. (2020). Teacher competency and perception in lesson planning using a software prototype. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity, and Change, 13(3), 811-827. https://www.ijicc.net/images/vol_13/Iss_3/133101_Pratiwi_2020_E_R.pdf
  38. Puentedura, R. (2014). Learning, technology, and the SAMR model: Goals, processes, and practice. http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2014/06/29/LearningTechnologySAMRModel.pdf
  39. Ramadhan, S., Sukma, E., & Indriyani, V. (2019). Teacher competence in utilizing digital media literacy in education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1339, 012111. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1339/1/012111
  40. Sadeghi, K. & Richards, J. C. (2021). Professional development among English language teachers: challenges and recommendations for practice. Heliyon, 7(9), e08053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08053
  41. Setyadi, H. J., Taruk, M., & Pakpahan, H. S. (2019). Analisis dampak penggunaan teknologi (technostress) kepada dosen dan staff karyawan yang berpengaruh terhadap kinerja di dalam organisasi (Studi kasus: Perguruan tinggi di Kalimantan Timur) [Analysis of the impact of the use of technology (technostress) on lecturers and staff employees that affect performance within the organization (Case study: Universities in East Kalimantan)]. Informatika Mulawarman [Mulawarman Informatics], 14(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.30872/jim.v14i1.1792
  42. Smith, H. E., Stair, K. S., Blackburn, J. J., & Easley, M. (2018). Is there an app for that?: Describing smartphone availability and educational technology adoption level of Louisiana school-based agricultural educators. Journal of Agricultural Education, 59(1), 238-254. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.01238
  43. Tang, C. M., & Chaw, L. Y. (2015). Digital literacy: A prerequisite for effective learning in a blended learning environment?. The Electronic Journal of e‐Learning, 14(1), 54‐65. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1099109.pdf
  44. Tarafdar, M., Pullins, E. B., & Ragu-Nathan, T. S. (2015). Technostress: Negative effect on performance and possible mitigations. Information Systems Journal, 25(2), 103-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12042
  45. Ting, Y.-L. (2015). Tapping into students’ digital literacy and designing negotiated learning to promote learner autonomy. The Internet and Higher Education, 26, 25-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.004
  46. Ven, E. V. D. (2022). Envy and admiration: Emotion and motivation following upward social comparison. Cognition and Emotion, 31(1),1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2015.1087972