Keywords
technology acceptance
intention to use
digital self-efficacy
attitude toward ICT
non-university teachers
How to Cite
Abstract
This study examines factors associated with information and communication technology (ICT) acceptance and intention to use in teaching among non‑university teachers in the Autonomous Community of La Rioja, Spain. Drawing on an extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), a validated questionnaire was administered to 1,259 teachers from public and private‑subsidized schools. Central motivational constructs (perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, digital self‑efficacy, and attitude toward ICT), contextual factors (institutional support, availability of resources, and subjective norm), and the outcome variable (intention to use ICT in teaching) were analysed using structural equation modelling and multigroup analysis. The results indicate that attitude toward ICT is the strongest predictor of intention to use, with perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and digital self‑efficacy acting as key mediators. Digital self‑efficacy shows a strong association with both perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. Statistically significant differences emerged by age, qualification, teaching experience, and school characteristics: younger teachers and those with higher qualifications or less experience reported higher intention to use ICT, whereas more experienced teachers reported greater reliance on institutional and family support, and more favourable perceptions were observed in private‑subsidized and urban schools. A complementary qualitative analysis reveals ambivalent perceptions of ICT in teaching: teachers recognize its pedagogical potential but also express concerns about student distraction, digital divides, screen overexposure, and insufficient training and resources. Overall, the findings highlight the need for comprehensive strategies that address individual factors, school‑level conditions, and targeted professional development in order to support sustainable digital transformation in educational settings.
References
[1] L. Boeskens and K. Meyer, Policies for the Digital Transformation of School Education: Evidence from the Policy Survey on School Education in the Digital Age (OECD Education Working Papers No. 328). Paris, France: OECD Publishing, 2025, doi: 10.1787/464dab4d-en. (in English)
[2] L. Salmerón and P. Delgado, "Critical analysis of the effects of digital technologies on reading and learning," Cultura y Educación, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 465–480, 2019, doi: 10.1080/11356405.2019.1630958. (in Spanish)
[3] T. Consoli, M. L. Schmitz, C. Antonietti, P. Gonon, A. Cattaneo, and D. Petko, "Quality of technology integration matters: Positive associations with students’ behavioral engagement and digital competencies for learning," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 7719–7752, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10639-024-13118-8. (in English)
[4] M. A. Mekheimer, "Effective technology integration in higher education: A mixed-methods study of professional development," Education and Information Technologies, vol. 30, pp. 25013–25058, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10639-025-13750-y. (in English)
[5] V. W. Vongkulluksn, K. Xie, and M. A. Bowman, "The role of value on teachers' internalization of external barriers and externalization of personal beliefs for classroom technology integration," Computers & Education, vol. 118, pp. 70–81, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.009. (in English)
[6] R. Scherer, F. Siddiq, and J. Tondeur, "The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers' adoption of digital technology in education," Computers & Education, vol. 128, pp. 13–35, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.009. (in English)
[7] UNESCO, Global Education Monitoring Report Summary 2023: Technology in Education: A Tool on Whose Terms? Paris, France: UNESCO, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000385723. (in English)
[8] J. Sosa-Alonso, V. Hernández, A. L. Sanabria, and A. Bethencourt, "Adoption of digital educational resources by early childhood education teachers: A fad or a conviction?," Computers & Education, vol. 238, Art. no. 105396, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105396. (in English)
[9] T. Teo, "Factors influencing teachers' intention to use technology: Model development and test," Computers & Education, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 2432–2440, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.008. (in English)
[10] F. D. Davis, "Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology," MIS Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319–340, 1989, doi: 10.2307/249008. (in English)
[11] C. Antonietti, A. Cattaneo, and F. Amenduni, "Can teachers’ digital competence influence technology acceptance in vocational education?," Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 132, Art. no. 107266, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107266. (in English)
[12] A. Granic and N. Marangunić, "Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review," British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 2572–2593, 2019, doi: 10.1111/bjet.12864. (in English)
[13] J. Sun, Q. Wu, Z. Ma, W. Zheng, and Y. Hu, "Understanding pre-service teachers' acceptance of generative artificial intelligence: An extended technology acceptance model approach," Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 73, pp. 1975–1997, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s11423-025-10495-w. (in English)
[14] S. Kelly, S.-A. Kaye, and O. Oviedo-Trespalacios, "What factors contribute to the acceptance of artificial intelligence? A systematic review," Telematics and Informatics, vol. 77, Art. no. 101925, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2022.101925. (in English)
[15] V. Venkatesh and F. D. Davis, "A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies," Management Science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 186–204, 2000, doi: 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926. (in English)
[16] B. G. López, J. S. Rodríguez, and G. A. Cerveró, "The influence of teachers’ attitudes in the use of the new technologies," Revista Española de Pedagogía, vol. 64, no. 233, 2025, doi: 10.22550/2174-0909.2362. (in Spanish)
[17] V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, "User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view," MIS Quarterly, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003, doi: 10.2307/30036540. (in English)
[18] T. Padilla-Carmona, J. Gil-Flores, and A. Rísquez, "Self-efficacy in the use of ICT amongst mature students," Educación XX1, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 19–40, 2022, doi: 10.5944/educxx1.30254. (in English)
[19] A. Bandura, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, 1986. (in English)
[20] S. Jiang, H. Li, and D. Gan, "Technology acceptance model for online education: Identifying interdisciplinary topics and their evolution based on BERTopic model," Social Sciences & Humanities Open, vol. 12, Art. no. 101831, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101831. (in English)
[21] A. Schorr, "The technology acceptance model (TAM) and its importance for digitalization research: A review," in Sciendo eBooks, Sciendo, 2023, p. 55, doi: 10.2478/9788366675896-005. (in English)
[22] I. González-Medina, E. Pérez-Navío, and O. Gavín Chocano, "Analysis of digital competence in elementary school teachers according to their socio-demographic factors and experience," Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, no. 71, pp. 179–201, 2024, doi: 10.12795/pixelbit.107277. (in Spanish)
[23] F. Navaridas-Nalda, M. Clavel-San Emeterio, R. Fernández-Ortiz, and M. Arias-Oliva, "The strategic influence of school principal leadership in the digital transformation of schools," Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 112, Art. no. 106481, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106481. (in English)
[24] S. M. Ravizza, M. G. Uitvlugt, and K. M. Fenn, "Connected and disconnected: How laptop use relates to classroom learning," Psychological Science, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 171–180, 2017, doi: 10.1177/0956797616677314. (in English)
[25] M. Á. Pérez-Juárez, D. González-Ortega, and J. M. Aguiar-Pérez, "Digital distractions from the point of view of higher education students," Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 7, Art. no. 6044, 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15076044. (in English)
[26] X. Wang and B. Li, "Technostress among university teachers in higher education: A study using multidimensional person–environment misfit theory," Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 10, Art. no. 1791, 2019, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01791. (in English)
[27] S. Moosa and U. Ramnarain, "The impact of an empowerment evaluation professional development program on physical sciences teachers' attitudes, beliefs and behavioral intentions to integrate ICT into their science lessons," Frontiers in Education, vol. 8, Art. no. 1159373, 2023, doi: 10.3389/feduc.2023.1159373. (in English)
[28] J. F. Hair Jr., W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R. E. Anderson, Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Pearson, 2010. (in English)
[29] J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, "A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 115–135, 2015, doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8. (in English)
[30] R. B. Kline, Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 5th ed. New York, NY, USA: Guilford Press, 2023. (in English)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Fermín Navaridas-Nalda, Ana González-Marcos, Marta Terroba-Acha, Jesús Castellano-Latorre