Brit J Educational Tech - 2020 - Huang - Examining The Role of Technology Related Policy and Constructivist Teaching Belief

British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 52 No 1 2021 441–460
doi:10.1111/bjet.13027
Examining the role of technology-related policy and

constructivist teaching belief on English teachers’ technology
acceptance: A study in Chinese universities
Fang Huang and Timothy Teo

Fang Huang is an associate professor in the School of Foreign Languages at Qingdao University in China. Her
research interests are teachers’ and students’ beliefs in educational technology. Timothy Teo is a professor at Murdoch
University in Australia. His research interests are technology adoption, psychometric measurements. Address for
correspondence: Fang Huang, School of Foreign Languages, Qingdao University, 308 Ningxia road, Shinan District,
Qingdao, China. Email: huang311fang@163.com
Abstract
This large scale study investigated the influences that technology-related policies and
teachers’ constructivist teaching beliefs have on their intention to use technology in
Chinese universities. Data were collected from 696 English teachers working in 59 Chinese
universities. Five variables (subjective norm, constructivist teaching belief, perceived
importance of policy, computer self-efficacy and voluntariness) were examined in this
study. Results indicated that perceived importance of policy, constructivist teaching beliefs
and subjective norm were significant antecedents of perceived usefulness. The relationship
between subjective norm and teachers’ intentions to use technology was moderated by
voluntariness. Besides perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use also had significantly
influenced English teachers’ behavioural intention. Overall, the research model explained
69% of variance of teachers’ intentions to use technology. This study has the potential
to enrich our understanding of technology acceptance in teaching by contextualising
the study in the rarely researched English teaching context in Chinese universities. The
findings from this study also provide suggestions for policy makers and teacher educators.
Keywords: policy, constructivist teaching belief, English teachers, technology

acceptance, China
Introduction
Technology integration in teaching and learning has become an irreversible trend and brought
about a revolutionary progress, Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) is not an exception.
Technology diffusion contributed to teaching from both pedagogical and practical perspectives,
such as enabling paradigm shift and role change (Wang & Coleman, 2009); improving teaching
effectiveness through in-time and individualised feedback to students, increasing students’ learning
motivation (Teo, Huang, & Hoi, 2018). In language teaching, technology provides authentic tar-
get language input, increases language production and language use diversities (Golonka, Bowles,
Frank, Richardson, & Freynik, 2014) and provides more communicative opportunities (Li, 2014).
Last but not least, technology makes teaching and learning enjoyable (Huang, Teo, & Zhou, 2019).
© 2020 British Educational Research Association

14678535, 2021, 1, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.13027 by National Dong Hwa University, Wiley Online Library on [06/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
442 British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 52 No 1 2021
Practitioner Notes
What is already known about this topic
• The technology acceptance model (TAM) model is well-known for examining technol-
ogy adoption with unexplored areas in education.
• Despite the pervasiveness of technologies, teachers reluctance suggests the existence
of an adoption problem.
• Teacher perceived importance of technology-related policies and constructivist teach-
ing beliefs are two constructs from the second-order barriers little studied in TAM-
based models applied in the educational field that can provide important information
for the development of teacher professional training initiatives.
What this paper adds
• The TAM-based model in this research evidences the influence of second-order barri-
ers in the adoption of technologies among Chinese university teachers.
• Teacher perceived technology-related policy has an important effect on the perceived
usefulness but not behavioural intention.
• The moderating effect of voluntariness was found only in the relationship between
subjective norm and behavioural intention.
Implications for practice and/or policy
• Technology adoption models should pay more attention to unexplored second-order
barriers and context, especially technology-related policy in China.
• The higher education institutions may emphasise importance of technology-related
policy and constructivist teaching beliefs when carrying out teachers’ professional
training programme.
While many countries have formulated technology-related policies to promote technology use
in schools (Lim, Chai, & Churchill, 2010), the extent to which technology-related policies have
impacted on teaching behaviour has not been well-addressed in literature.
There is an evidence to suggest that important agents (eg, policy-makers) may influence teach-
ers’ thinking and shape their behaviours on the degree to which technology is used (Huang,
Teo, Sánchez Prieto, García-Peñalvo, & Olmos-Migueláñez, 2019). However, teachers’ responses
would vary on whether they perceive the expectations and demands for these agents to be vol-
untary or mandatory in nature (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). From the literature, it has been sug-
gested that voluntariness moderates one’s perception and significantly affects an individual’s
intention to use technology (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). However, while
informative, previous studies had focused on the business context hence studies examining the
role of voluntariness among educational users were lacking. In particular, little is known of the
influence of teacher perceived voluntariness on their intention to use technology in the Chinese
context.
Besides above-mentioned research gap in technology acceptance, the influence of teachings’
beliefs on intention to use technology was also not well addressed (Teo et al., 2018). The impor-
tance of beliefs on teachers’ technology adoption was attested by scholars who found that beliefs
about teaching had acted as second-order barriers (fundamental and personal barriers such as
teaching beliefs, self-efficacy, etc.), which played more important roles than first-order barriers
(institutional barriers such as equipment access) (Ertmer, 1999; Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich,

Technology policy and voluntariness 443
Sadik, Sendurur, & Sendurur, 2012). For example, later studies by Teo et al. (2018) and Huang,
Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al. (2019) found that teachers’ constructivist teaching belief was a signifi-
cant influence on their technology acceptance. However, those studies were limited in their small
sample size and failure to account for external variables.
Research context: Technology integration in EFL teaching in China

Technology use in EFL teaching enables teachers to enrich authentic linguistic and cultural
materials for teachers and learners who are not native speakers of English (Wang & Coleman,
2009). In addition, technology improves the quality and depth of students’ involvement (Huang
& Chuang, 2015), facilitates interactive activities (Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019) and
consequently, enhances language teaching and learning (Surface, Dierdorff, & Watson, 2007).
Since English is not the mother-tongue in China, Chinese students do learn English in an artificial
and unauthentic environment. To overcome this, some teachers have engaged the affordances of
information and communication technologies (ICT) to broaden students’ international perspec-
tives and enable them to learn diverse English forms and cultures.
With the high demand for English learning in China (Pan & Block, 2011) and advantages of
technology integration mentioned above, the Chinese government has issued a series of poli-
cies aimed at regulating technology use in teaching and learning. The Ministry of Education in
China (MoE) issued “Education informatization 2.0 action planning” in 2018 to promote the
use of information science (such as artificial intelligence) in teaching and learning. At the uni-
versity level, the College English Teaching Guide (2017) stipulate that English teachers should use
advanced ICT extensively and develop Internet-based courses. Besides, the above policies sug-
gested that universities should transform the existing unitary teaching model (teacher-centred
language teaching) by implementing a computer- and classroom-based teaching model to cope
with the sharp increase in student enrolments in Chinese universities and the limited teaching
resources for EFL instruction. They also stated the new teaching model should be built on digital
and network technology so that English teaching could be free from time or place constraints and
geared towards individualised and autonomous learning of students.
Problem statement and research gap

Technology-related policies do not guarantee Chinese EFL teachers’ technology use (Huang,
Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019). Recent studies have found that Chinese EFL teachers’ tech-
nology use is best described as either reluctant or at a limited level (Li, 2014; Liu, Lin, & Zhang,
2017). This is exemplified by Li (2014) who found that EFL teachers in China tended to use
technology at the behaviouristic level (technology as a tool to deliver contents) and few teachers
would use technology at the communicative level (eg, to stimulate discussion, motivate inter-
action) or integrative level (eg, using multimedia and the Internet to practice language skills
and conducting asynchronous and synchronous communication) (Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto,
et al., 2019).
To understand teachers’ less than desired responses to technology integration for EFL teach-
ing, researchers have examined the factors that influence teachers’ intentions to use technol-
ogy. However, these studies were mostly conducted in developed countries where technology use
in teaching and learning was found to be prevalent (eg, Ertmer, 1999; Sánchez-Prieto, Olmos-
Migueláñez, & García-Peñalvo, 2017). As such, these research findings have limited applications
in other cultures since people in different countries may think and behave differently (Hofstede,
2001; Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019). For example, suggested in technology accep-
tance research involving the TAM, the relationship between perceived usefulness and behavioural

intention was widely supported in studies among students as technology users (Abdullah, Ward,
& Ahmed, 2016; Chang, Yan, & Tseng, 2012). However, this relationship did not hold up for uni-
versity students in China (Huang, Teo, & Zhou, 2020) and the lack of consensus was attributed to
the strong group-orientated beliefs (eg, group requirements and needs) that were held by Chinese
students (Huang et al., 2020). In addition, the focus on technology acceptance research has been
on preservice teachers (eg, Sánchez-Prieto et al., 2017; Teo, 2009; Teo et al., 2018) and little, if
any attention was paid to understanding the factors that impact on in-service English teachers’
intention to use technology (Huang, Teo, & Zhou, 2019). Further, as policies influence people’s
thinking, the degree to which technology-related policies have impacted on teaching behaviour
has not been well-addressed in literature.
In China, many people seek for conformity in thinking and behaviour due to their collectivist
orientation (Hofstede, 2001). Hence it is reasonable to believe that significant others’ opinions
would shape teachers’ thinking and practice to a large extent. However, while preservice teachers
were trained with a mandate to use technology for future English teaching, in-service teachers
have greater autonomy in the use of technology and the nature of such use may be shaped by
how they perceive the importance of others’ opinions or requirements.
Aim of the study

This study aims to investigate the influence of perceived importance of policy and constructivist
teaching beliefs on university English teachers’ intentions to use technology by contextualising
an extended technology acceptance model in an under-researched context, China. To clarify, we
did not limit technology to a specific technology tool but had used the term to refer to a broad
notion including various technological devices and tools that teachers use in teaching English.
These may include but not limited to computers, mobile devices and the Internet, etc. The follow-
ing questions guide this study’s direction:
1. To what extent does the proposed research model explain Chinese university English teach-
ers’ intentions to use technology?
2. To what extent do EFL teachers’ perceptions of policy influence their intention to use technol-
ogy for teaching?
3. In what way does voluntariness moderate the relationships between teachers’ perceptions of
significant others and their intention to use technology?
Literature review and model development

The present study relies on the technology acceptance model (Davis, 1989) and Innovation
Diffusion Theory (Rogers, 1995) as the core framework. The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
posits that perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use are critical determinants of behavioural
intentions of technology use (Davis, 1989). The Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) proposes that
technology adoption is a process in which a given innovative technology is recognised and com-
municated over a span of time among people in a social system (Rogers, 1995). In the process, the
main elements that influence the diffusion and adoption are: perceived attributes of innovations,
communication channels, social norms and individual characteristics (Rogers, 1995). Although
both theories are widely applied in different social or institutional contexts, limited empirical
studies have incorporated them to predict individuals’ intentions to use technology. This study is
an attempt to adapted the variables from these model to understand technology use among EFL
teachers in Chinese universities.

Technology acceptance model (TAM)

Proposed by Davis (1989), the TAM is among the first to include psychological factors to explain
users’ technology acceptance and has received empirical support in diverse fields including educa-
tion (Teo, 2009; Teo et al., 2018). In the TAM, perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use
(PEU) were proposed as important antecedents of users’ behavioural intentions (BI) which leads to
actual usage. In the TAM, PU refers to the extent to which a user thinks using technology improves
job productivity and PEU measures a user’s thinking on whether using technology is free of effort.
In this study, behavioural intention (BI) is measured as a user’s willingness to use technology.
Following the proposed relationships in the TAM, the following hypotheses were formulated:
Hypothesis 1: PU will have a significant influence on BI.
Hypothesis 2: PEU will have a significant influence on PU.
Hypothesis 3: PEU will have a significant influence on BI.
Although the TAM has been shown to possess predictive validity across a broad range of technol-
ogies and user populations, for example Singaporean preservice teachers use of computer (Teo,
2009), Chinese mainland English teachers’ ICT adoption (Teo et al., 2018), Hong Kong primary
English teachers’ ICT acceptance (Bai, Wang, & Chai, 2019) and Spanish preservice teachers’
acceptance of mobile technologies in teaching (Sánchez-Prieto, Olmos-Migueláñez, & García-
Peñalvo, 2016, 2017), it has been suggested that the TAM may be too simplistic and that an
inclusion of external variables into the model would enable people to gain deeper understand-
ings of the triggers or barriers of technology acceptance (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). In addition,
research on technology acceptance also needs to take into consideration contextual influences
(Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). Taking the above views into
account, below are several constructs inserted into the TAM as external variables.
Subjective norm (SN)

As a variable proposed to be a direct determinant of an individual’s behavioural intention in the
Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) proposed by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975) and the Theory of
Planned Behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991), subjective norm (SN) measures “a person’s perception
that most people who are important to him or her think he or she should or should not perform
the behaviour in question” (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975, p. 302). Although the original TAM did not
include SN, scholars have found direct links between SN and BI in business (Venkatesh & Davis,
2000) and educational contexts (eg, Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019; Teo, 2009). In the
latter, it was proposed that when a leader perceived that a certain system was useful, a staff would
think the same (Huang & Teo, 2020). In this study, we expected that English teachers are likely to
think that using technology for English teaching is necessary and important because his/her sig-
nificant others (eg, school principals and colleagues) had explicitly extolled the benefits of using
technology. Below are the hypotheses associated with SN:
Hypothesis 4: SN will have a significant influence on PU.
Hypothesis 5: SN will have a significant influence on BI.
Perceived importance of policy (PIP)

The IDT speculates the importance of communication channels and social norms on peo-
ple’s adoption of innovation. For individuals, one of the important psychological needs is the
individual’s desire to feel connected to others (Roca & Gagné, 2008). In the same manner, when
a specific technology-related teaching policy is issued and widely promoted in a country, it is rea-
sonable to expect teachers perceptions to be affected in order to feel “connected” and, in a col-
lectivism-oriented culture, some teachers might even disregard their personal views and comply
with policy requirements (Hofstede, 2001).
Previous studies found that an increase in classroom technology use was linked to a favourable
policy environment (eg, Barron, Kemker, Harmes, & Kalaydjian, 2003; Tearle, 2003). Successful
technology use was more likely when teachers understood and shared the value of technolo-
gy-related school policies that promotes the usefulness of technologies (Tondeur, van Keer, van
Braak, & Valcke, 2008). In China, with a centralised educational system, the influence of pol-
icy on teachers’ technology use has found support among scholars (Sang, Valcke, van Braak,
Tondeur, & Zhu, 2011). Among university teachers, Huang and Teo (2020) found that teachers’
perceived importance of policy (PIP) was a significant influence on their perceived usefulness of
technology.
As mentioned earlier, the English teaching policy advocated a computer- and internet-based
teaching model in Chinese universities. We posit that English teachers who perceive policy as
important might accept what the policy promotes, which is the usefulness and effectiveness that
technology brings to English teaching, and thus, forming an intention to use technology. In this
study, perceived importance of policy (PIP) refers to the degree to which teachers view policy as
important in their intention to use technology (Huang & Teo, 2020; Sang et al., 2011). The fol-
lowing hypothesis was formulated:
Hypothesis 6: PIP will have a significant influence on PU.
Hypothesis 7: PIP will have a significant influence on BI.
Constructivist teaching beliefs (CTB)

Constructivist teaching and learning has been widely promoted in language teaching (Smith,
2001; Teo et al., 2018). Social constructivism argues that human development is socially situated
and knowledge is constructed through interaction with others (McKinley, 2015). Constructivist
learning theories propose that learners are active knowledge constructors rather than passive in-
formation receivers (Perkins, 1991). When technology is integrated into teaching and learning,
learners can share information and further construct knowledge through various technological
tools (Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019; Yunus, Salehi, & Chenzi, 2012). Previous stud-
ies suggested that constructivist teaching belief (CTB), measured as the degree to which teach-
ers hold a constructivist teaching belief (Teo, Chai, Hung, & Lee, 2008), is a significant factor
in influencing computer use among preservice teachers (Sang, Valcke, Van Braak, & Tondeur,
2010) and in-service English teachers (Teo et al., 2018). In addition, teachers holding CTB used
technology more than those with traditional conceptions for teaching and learning (Huang, Teo,
Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019).
Hypothesis 8: CTB will have a significant influence on PU.
Computer self-efficacy (CSE)

According to Bandura (1977), self-efficacy refers to the extent of an individual’s belief or judge-
ment in his or her abilities to organise, execute actions and achieve the specific goals. Self-efficacy
research usually focuses on a specific field, domain or context, such as computer self-efficacy

(CSE) which is measured as the extent to which an individual teacher believes that he or she has
the ability to perform a teaching task with technology (Compeau & Higgins, 1995). Previous
studies had found CSE to be a strong determinant of an individual English teachers’ perception of
PEU and acceptance decision (Bai et al., 2019; Teo et al., 2018). Individuals with a high level of
CSE do not feel frustrated easily by unexpected difficulties when using technologies and will per-
sist with their efforts and consequently, they are more likely to overcome difficulties or obstacles
associated with technology use (Compeau & Higgins, 1995). On the contrary, those with a low
level of CSE might be frustrated more easily by difficulties or obstacles when they use technolo-
gies, resulting in a low perception of their confidence and ability to use technology.
Hypothesis 9: CSE will have a significant influence on PEU.
Voluntariness
Warshaw (1980) suggested subjective norm influences an individual’s behavioural intention (BI)
to use technology through the internalisation and identification process or simply by compliance.
However, Hartwick and Barki (1994) obtained mixed findings on the influence of subjective
norm on behavioural intention. They posited that subjective norm was a significant influence on
behavioural intention under mandatory settings, not in voluntary settings (Venkatesh & Davis,
2000). The authors explained that the causal mechanism explaining or underlying this influence
is compliance and that the direct effect that compliance has on subjective norm and behavioural
intention relationship is theorised to operate when an individual believes that a superior wants or
requires him or her to perform a specific behaviour and the superior has the power to reward the
behaviour or punish non-behaviour (Warshaw, 1980). To distinguish between the mandatory
and voluntary settings, Venkatesh and Davis (2000) defined voluntariness as the extent to which
the potential technology users perceive technology adoption and usage decisions to be non-man-
datory. Despite the promotion of technology in teaching, English teachers in China might not
perceive technology use as completely mandated, hence it is reasonable expect voluntariness
(VOL) to have a moderation effect on the proposed relationship between teachers’ perceptions of
subjective norm and their intention to use technology.
Hypothesis 10: VOL moderates the relationship between SN and BI.
Given that behavioural intentions were significantly associated with actual system use (Davis,
1989; Sánchez-Prieto, Olmos-Migueláñez, & García-Peñalvo, 2016), in this study, we are more
interested in unpacking factors influencing teachers’ intentions. Based on the above discussions,
the research model in the current study is presented in Figure 1.
Method
Participants
Participants are 800 English teachers at 59 Chinese universities from 20 provinces. Considering
the economic and geographic diversity in China, we have collected data from in 20 provinces, two
Special Administrative Regions (Xinjiang & Tibet) were also included. Informed consent was ob-
tained from participants. Although they teach English, the teachers are ethnically Chinese. After
data screening and deletion of incomplete questionnaires, 696 valid responses were retained and
used for data analysis.
In line with the general profile of Chinese universities, teachers from key universities (211 or
985 universities) form a small percentage, with the majority of the participants from universities
outside of the special programmes (non-211 or 985 universities). As for gender, most participants

Figure 1: The research model. Note: PU = perceived usefulness; PEU = perceived ease of use; BI = behavioural
intention; SN = subjective norm; CTB = constructivist teaching belief; PIP = perceived importance of policy;
CSE = computer self-efficacy. VOL = voluntariness [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Table 1: Profile of participants (N = 696)
Profile Frequency Mean SD Range
University type
211/985 153
Non 211/985 543
Gender
Male 163
Female 533
Age 39.16 6.96 23–62
Years of teaching 14.04 7.76 1–40
Years of using technology 11.93 5.30 0–30
Years of teaching with technology 9.14 4.63 0–21
were females (n = 533), in line with the profile of English teachers at Chinese universities (Teo
et al., 2018). Their age was 39.16 (SD = 6.96) and they have an average of 9.14 years of teaching
experience using technology. Table 1 summarises the information of the participants in this study.
Instruments and procedure

In the current study, a self-report questionnaire was used. In it, general educational technologies
such as computer- and internet-based technologies, information communication technologies
(ICT) and mobile technologies were specified, as these would be familiar to English teachers in
China (Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019). The questionnaire comprised two parts. Part
One include questions on demographics such as gender, age, affiliation, years of teaching and
years of teaching with technologies. Part Two consists of a series of items that measure each vari-
ables in the research model (see Figure 1) They are perceived usefulness (six items), perceived ease
of use (four items), behavioural intention to use technology in teaching (five items), subjective
norm (six items), perceived importance of policy (six items), constructivist teaching belief (seven
items), computer self-efficacy (seven items) and voluntariness (six items). Appendix shows the list
of items and the sources from where these were adapted.
All items were presented in English and data were collected using convenience sampling. To be
specific, participants were invited by the authors who have contacts with teachers from these
universities. Souvenir were provided to express appreciation for their participation. Among the
800 participants, 641 were reached through paper-based surveys and 159 through an online
questionnaire on WeChat, a popular free messaging and calling app that provides online survey
services in China.
Results
Descriptive statistics
Table 2 shows most teachers (93.7%) had used computers and projectors in English teaching.
Other frequently used tools include multimedia courseware (55.7%), followed by smartphones
(49.3%), Learning Management Systems (LMS) (46.3%), tablets (27.9%) and, digital black-
boards (17.8%).
The descriptive statistics for the constructs used in this study are presented in Table 3. The results
suggested generally that university English teachers respond positively to technology use in
teaching.
In addition, kurtosis and skewness were assessed for univariate normality by applying the criteria
of |3| and |8|, respectively (Kline, 2010). The skewness and kurtosis in the main study ranged
from −.637 to .119 and −.807 to .297, respectively, indicating that the data in this study approx-
imated a normal distribution.
Model test
Structural equation modelling (SEM) was conducted using AMOS 22.0 on a congeneric model
with uncorrelated errors with maximum likelihood as the method for estimating the parameters.
Table 2: Technology tools used in teaching
Computers Digital Multimedia

& projectors Smartphone LMS blackboard Tablet courseware
Number 652 343 322 124 194 388

Percentage 93.70% 49.30% 46.30% 17.80% 27.90% 55.70%
Note: LMS = Learning Management System.
Table 3: Descriptive statistics of constructs in the study
Construct N of items Mean SD
Perceived usefulness 6 5.82 .83

Perceived ease of use 4 4.95 1.06
Subjective norm 6 5.41 .91
Computer self-efficacy 7 5.41 .85
Behavioural intention 5 5.79 .90
Constructivist teaching belief 7 6.05 .81
Perceived importance of policy 6 5.37 .88
Voluntariness 6 4.93 1.04

This study adopted the two-step approach suggested by Anderson and Gerbing (1988) model
testing.
Test for measurement model
The measurement model analysis describes the factor loadings of the underlying constructs, as
well as the model fit between the observed indicators and the underlying constructs compared
with the sample data. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with maximum likelihood estimation
was performed to analyse the measurement model. To test for multivariate normality, the value
of Mardia’s coefficient was calculated as 333.758 and this is less than the recommended value of
p (p + 2), where p indicates the total number of observed items (41 * 43 = 1763). Following the
recommendation of Raykov and Marcoulides (2011), multivariate normality was achieved and
the data in the main study were considered adequate for confirmatory factor analysis.
The factor loadings of the constructs are shown in Table 4. All item loadings were near or above
.7, indicating the significance of these items towards their underlying constructs (Hair, Black,
Babin, & Anderson, 2010). For the variable of voluntariness, we tested the factor loadings sep-
arately since it was neither an exogenous nor endogenous variable in the research model. The
factor loadings of VOL items ranged from .613 to .823, indicating the significance these items
towards VOL. Composite reliability (CR) and average variance extraction (AVE) were used to
examine the reliability and convergent validity of the variables based on the minimum acceptable
limits of .70 (Gefen, Straub, & Boudreau, 2000) and .50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981), respectively.
Tables 4 and 5 indicates that all CRs and AVEs met the above criteria, suggesting that the items
used in this study possess adequate psychometric properties.
The model fit indices used for the measurement model in this study included the ratio of the min-
imum fit function to its degree of freedom (χ2/df), for which a value lower than 3.0 is considered
desirable (Carmines & McIver, 1981). Other fit indices were the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) and
Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), with values greater than .90 indicating an acceptable fit (Hair et al.,
2010). Additionally, the Root-Mean-Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) and Standardised
Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) were reported, with a value less than .05 indicating a good
model fit (Hair et al., 2010). The results of this study indicated that the measurement model had
achieved a good model fit (χ2/df = 2.435, TLI = .951, CFI = .955, SRMR = .0451, RMSEA = .045
[.043, .048]).
Test of the structural model
A structural model describes the hypothesised relationships between the exogenous and endog-
enous variables. The proposed structural model in this study had achieved a good model fit (χ2/
df = 2.435, CFI = .948, TLI = .944, RMSEA = .048 [.046, 051], SRMR = .0601). In this study,
results suggested BI was significantly influenced by PU, PEU and SN, with 69% of variance ex-
plained. PU was significantly associated with PEU, SN, CTB and PIP, and PEU was significantly
explained by CSE. The variance explained for PU (by PEU, SN, PIP, CTB) and PEU (by CSE) were
58% and 34%, respectively. The relationships among constructs are shown in Table 6.
Test of moderation effect

To examine whether voluntariness (VOL) moderated the influence that SN has on BI, we per-
formed a moderation test by dividing the participants into two groups based on their responses to
items of VOL, namely high-and low-voluntariness groups. Chi-squares and degrees of freedom of
the unconstrained model and fully constrained model were compared and results from chi-square
difference test suggested that the two groups were significantly different in the research model
(p = .03). To be specific, the chi-square value for the constrained SN → BI relationship was
2989.568, which was higher than the value of 2989.08 (99% confidence level). Thus, we
Table 4: Factor loadings of the constructs in the study
Constructs Items USE SE CR AVE
PU PU1 1 0.758 0.903 0.609

PU2 1.012 0.794
PU3 1.052 0.789
PU4 0.902 0.778
PU5 1.048 0.741
PU6 1.002 0.819
PEU PEU1 1 0.732 0.887 0.664
PEU2 1.072 0.794
PEU3 1.316 0.895
PEU4 1.291 0.831
BI BI1 1 0.869 0.948 0.784
BI2 1.115 0.903
BI3 1.086 0.909
BI4 1.053 0.872
BI5 1.074 0.872
SN SN1 1 0.804 0.914 0.641
SN2 1.101 0.836
SN3 1.097 0.873
SN4 0.989 0.804
SN5 0.942 0.736
SN6 0.932 0.739
CTB CTB1 1 0.757 0.931 0.657
CTB2 1.040 0.743
CTB3 1.115 0.866
CTB4 1.084 0.807
CTB5 1.089 0.849
CTB6 1.052 0.823
CTB7 1.034 0.822
PIP PIP1 1 0.739 0.921 0.661
PIP2 1.018 0.733
PIP3 1.213 0.839
PIP4 1.316 0.868
PIP5 1.348 0.852
PIP6 1.261 0.838
CSE CSE1 1 0.801 0.917 0.614
CSE2 1.015 0.806
CSE3 0.964 0.841
CSE4 0.954 0.698
CSE5 0.966 0.784
CSE6 1.011 0.776
CSE7 0.884 0.771
Note: PU = perceived usefulness; PEU = perceived ease of use; BI = behavioural intention; SN = subjective
norm; CTB = constructivist teaching belief; PIP = perceived importance of policy; CSE = computer self-
efficacy, USE = unstandardised estimates; SE = standardised estimates; CR = Critical Ratio; AVE = Average
variance extracted.
concluded that the moderating effect of VOL on SN → BI relationship achieved 99% confidence.
The results also suggested that the SN → BI relationship was stronger (standardised coefficient =
.457) for those who perceived a lower level of voluntariness than those who perceived higher level
of VOL (standardised coefficient = .335).

Table 5: Square root of AVE and correlation between the constructs
PIOP PU PEU BI SN CTB CSE
PIOP 0.813
PU 0.596 0.780
PEU 0.512 0.506 0.815
BI 0.598 0.735 0.550 0.885
SN 0.688 0.653 0.579 0.759 0.800
CTB 0.527 0.644 0.315 0.649 0.557 0.811
CSE 0.688 0.634 0.558 0.683 0.700 0.607 0.783
Note: Diagonal elements in bold are the square root of the AVE. PU = perceived usefulness; PEU = per-
ceived ease of use; BI = behavioural intention; SN = subjective norm; CTB = constructivist teaching belief;
PIP = perceived importance of policy; CSE = computer self-efficacy.
Table 6: Results of the hypotheses
Hypotheses Paths Standardised coefficients Results
H1 PU → BI .403*** Supported
H2 PEU → PU .183** Supported
H3 PEU → BI .103*** Supported
H4 SN → PU .236 Supported
H5 SN → BI .450*** Supported
H6 PIP → PU .140** Supported
H7 PIP → BI .006 Not Supported
H8 CTB → PU .395*** Supported
H9 CSE → PEU .583*** Supported
Note: PU = perceived usefulness; PEU = perceived ease of use; BI = behavioural intention; SN = subjec-
tive norm; CTB = constructivist teaching belief; PIP = perceived importance of policy; CSE = computer
self-efficacy.
**p < .05; ***p < .001
Discussion
This large-scale study examined factors that influence Chinese university English teachers’ inten-
tions to use technology in teaching by using an extended technology acceptance model (TAM).
Overall, the results support the validity of the extended TAM to explain university English teach-
ers’ intentions to use technology in China. The model explained 69% of variance of English
teachers’ behavioural intentions. The variance explained is higher than that in the original TAM
(40% to 50%) according to Davis (1989). The following sections discuss the findings in detail.
Supported relationships
Of the nine hypothesised relationships, eight were supported. In line with the literature (Davis,
1989), perceived usefulness (PU) played a significant role in influencing English teachers’ in-
tentions to use technology for teaching in Chinese universities. It indicated that English teach-
ers was focused on the capability and quality that technology provides for English teaching and
learning, such as enriching teaching materials, increasing communicative opportunities during
instruction and sustaining students’ motivation in learning (Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al.,
2019). This study also found that perceived ease of use (PEU) had significantly influenced PU
and BI, consistent with Sánchez-Prieto, Hernández-García, García-Peñalvo, Chaparro-Peláez,

& Olmos-Migueláñez, 2019), suggesting that in-service teachers consider the amount of effort
required in using technology to be important in their perceptions of usefulness and intentions.
Besides focusing on the effectiveness and efficiency that technology brings to teaching, teachers
also tend to consider the amount of time and effort they would need in engaging technology
(Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019; Li, 2014).
Besides PU, subjective norm (SN) was proposed as an antecedent for behavioural intention (BI) in
this study. The SN → BI relationship was significant in this study, providing support for previous
studies (Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019) which opined that university English teachers
in China perceive the opinions of significant others such as students, leaders and peers as import-
ant in their intentions to use technology. This relationship suggested that English teachers had
internalised others’ ideas in the process of shaping their own intentions to use technology.
Subjective norm (SN), constructivist teaching belief (CTB) and perceived importance of policy
(PIP) were proposed as extended variables to influence PU. The results supported all these hypoth-
eses, in line with previous studies (eg, Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019; Venkatesh & Bala,
2008). In previous studies, scholars have found that teachers with constructivist teaching beliefs
will use technology more than their counterparts who hold traditional teaching beliefs (Becker,
2001; Huang, Teo, Sánchez Prieto, et al., 2019; Teo et al., 2018). The relationship between belief
and technology use is supported in this study, which found teachers who believe in knowledge
building through communication and interaction were more likely to perceive using technology
as useful. Moreover, this study supports Ertmer (1999) who proposed that teachers’ pedagogical
beliefs are very important in influencing their teaching strategy, such as technology integration
into teaching and learning (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010). Teacher perceived importance
of policy (PIP) also significantly influenced their intentions to use technology. This is understand-
able given that Chinese teachers hold collectivist cultural orientations and lean towards confor-
mity in thinking and behaviour (Hofstede, 2001). When technology-related policy promote the
usefulness of technology, it is reasonable to expect teachers in China to perceive it in the same
way.
CSE was found to significantly influence PEU in the study, suggesting that if English teachers
believed themselves to have sufficient abilities to teach using technology, they would be more
likely to think using technology is free of effort (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). This is in line with pre-
vious studies in educational technology that indicated teaching beliefs, such as self-efficacy, are
second-order barriers that exert significant influences on teachers’ decision making regarding
technology use in the classrooms (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010).
Unsupported relationships
This study did not find support for the relationship between perceived importance of policy (PIP)
and BI. Despite their awareness of the importance of the policy and Guidelines on College English
Teaching (2017) in promoting the use of technology to support teaching and learning, teachers’
intention to use technology in this study were not significantly influenced. A plausible explana-
tion is that teachers were given the autonomy to decide on the extent which these policies would
shape their behaviours at work. Specifically, these policies allowed universities to determine how
best to integrate and engage technology for teaching and learning in ways to suit the unique
learning environment each university offer their students. Furthermore, this finding echoes pre-
vious research which suggested that policies do not guarantee teachers’ technology usage and
shape beliefs in a certain way (Teo, 2009). Teaching and learning, unlike those occur at the ele-
mentary and secondary schools, in higher institutions vary greatly in terms of structure, form
and intent (Chang, 2011; Chen, 2017) hence this may contribute to university teachers’ lack of

compliance with policy requirements. Lastly, experienced English teachers at Chinese universi-
ties tend to have their established teaching styles and strategies, which they may be reluctant to
change unless they have been personally persuaded to do the contrary. In such a situation, policy
requirements, although perceived of as important, may be compelling enough to warrant as shift
in teachers’ attitudes and behaviours, in connection to using technology for English (Li & Walsh,
2011).
Moderating effects
Voluntariness (VOL) was proposed as a moderator in the current study. Results of multigroup
analysis suggested that VOL moderate the relationship between SN and BI, which is consistent
with previous studies that suggested that the SN → BI relationship was very likely to exist in man-
datory settings (eg, Venkatesh & Bala, 2008; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). This means that when
English teachers perceive themselves to lack volition in deciding whether to use technology or
not, the influence of significant referees (faculty leaders, principles) on intentions to use technol-
ogy will be stronger and vice versa. This is understandable because faculty members in Chinese
universities operate in a hierarchical work environment where many would develop a perception
that they lack volition to decide on salient teaching matters and consequently, are made to feel
that opinions from the significant others (eg, faculty leaders, administrators) are adequate and
necessary to ensuring efficiency and effectiveness at the workplace to achieve the desired out-
comes (eg, Hartwick & Barki, 1994).
In addition, the moderation effects that VOL has on the SN → BI relationship also suggested the
mechanism of internalisation (Warshaw, 1980). For example, when an individual incorporates
the referee’s belief into his or her own belief structure, he/she would think that a system is useful
in order to align with the referee’s and this internalisation effect is stronger when using technol-
ogy is perceived as voluntary. If teachers perceived using technology in teaching as voluntary,
they would be less likely to be influenced by their significant others (SN). These relationships are
logical and understandable because teachers have the autonomy and are able to decide whether
their decisions to use technology would be influenced by their significant others or not.
Significance and contributions

By contextualising technology acceptance research among English teachers in China, where
technology acceptance is not well researched, the results of the present study demonstrated the
validity and applicability of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) in the Chinese educational
context. This study also generated additional insights to enrich our understanding of current
technology acceptance theories, particularly the extent to which certain variables (ie, subjective
norm, perceived importance of policy, constructivist teaching beliefs and computer self-efficacy,
voluntariness) would influence people’s perceptions on technology use. This research provided a
useful model for future studies on technology integration in education, given the commonalities
of research variables in diverse contexts, for example, technology adoption in teaching diverse
subjects, technology use in formal and informal contexts.
The current study contributes to practice in several ways. On the one hand, this study has the
potential to inform policymaking on technology-related issues in education. For instance, this
study revealed the significant role that policy played in influencing teachers’ perceptions of use-
fulness, stressing a need for policy makers to improve teachers’ awareness of policy requirement
across all levels of education. This study also study found significant antecedents of teachers’
intention to use technology, such as computer self-efficacy and constructivist teaching belief,
information that could be used for curriculum planning for preservice teacher training and
in-service teacher professional development. Last but not least, the results of this study inform
agents of teachers’ professional development on the significant enablers and barriers that influ-
ence Chinese in-service teachers’ decisions to use technology for teaching and learning.
Limitations and further study

The current study has limitations that should be noted for further research. Firstly, convenience
sampling has resulted in an unbalanced sampling distribution across the different regions of
China which may weaken the generalisability of the findings of this study. Most participants
came from universities located in Northern and Eastern China, while those from Western and
Southern China were limited. Further studies should be more inclusive in the choice of partic-
ipants, especially from Western and Southern China, in order to achieve good generalisability.
Secondly, this study employed a cross-sectional research design to investigate factors that influ-
ence English teachers’ intention to use technology. The study design is limited because it includes
neither any experimental study or manipulations to enable researchers to explore causal rela-
tionships among theoretical constructs (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000), nor a longitudinal design to
enable researchers to track possible changes through repeated observations of the same variables
over a period of time (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000). Future research could be conducted to exam-
ine causal relationships between variables by assigning teachers in different groups (eg, control
group and experimental group) or to track trajectories of changes in teachers’ perceptions of
variables. In addition, qualitative studies, which are helpful in generating a deeper understanding
of selected variables, were not included in the current study but are needed in the future study.
Thirdly, some variables that may influence teachers’ technology use, such as age, gender, habit,
image, perceived enjoyment and influence of technology types (eg, traditional technology and
innovative technology) were not tested in this study. Further studies may include these to further
examine English teachers’ intention to use technology in China. In addition, further studies may
examine the challenges teachers in Chinese universities face when using technology given that
many of them still hold traditional teaching beliefs and believe in teachers’ authority and power
in the teaching and learning process.
Conclusion
This study examined English teachers’ intention to use technology for teaching and learning in
Chinese universities. Using an extended model based on TAM to investigate factors that influence
their intention to use technology, this study explicitly tested the relevance of TAM in an under-re-
searched Chinese context.
The results of this study support existing findings (eg, Teo, 2009) that reiterate the shortcom-
ing of the TAM to explain teachers’ intentions, especially when applied to a culture and context
that is different from the business settings, in which TAM had originated and developed. By
extending the TAM (eg, perceived importance of policy and constructivist teaching beliefs) and
applying it to a different context (China), this study sheds light on the factors that contribute
to increasing its validity in explaining teachers’ intentions to use technology. Also, this study
has generated insights that contribute to policymaking and teachers’ continuing professional
development.
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by 2020 Qingdao Social Science and Planning Research Project
(QDSKL2001107): Urban and rural foreign language teachers’ informational teaching ability
and improvement during and post epidemic period.

Statements on open data, ethics and conflict of interest

The data of this research can be accessed after contacting the authors. The data are property of
the Qingdao University and will be released only with the permission of the institution.
Participants in this study were volunteers and their data are anonymous and confidential.
The authors have declared that they have no conflict of interest.
References
Abdullah, F., Ward, R., & Ahmed, E. (2016). Investigating the influence of the most commonly used external
variables of TAM on students’ Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) and Perceived Usefulness (PU) of e-portfolios.
Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 75–90.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
50(2), 179–211.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recom-
mended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423.
Bai, B., Wang, J., & Chai, C. S. (2019). Understanding Hong Kong primary school English teachers’ continu-
ance intention to teach with ICT. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–23.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review,
84(2), 191–215.
Barron, A. E., Kemker, K., Harmes, C., & Kalaydjian, K. (2003). Large-scale research study on technology
in K–12 schools: Technology integration as it relates to the National Technology Standards. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 35(4), 489–507.
Becker, H. (2001). How are teachers using computers in instruction? In Paper presented at the 2001 meetings
of the American educational research association. Retrieved from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/
conferences-pdf/how_are_teachers_using.pdf
Carmines, E., & McIver, J. (1981). Analyzing models with unobserved variables, social measurement: Current
issues. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Chang, C. C., Yan, C. F., & Tseng, J. S. (2012). Perceived convenience in an extended technology acceptance
model: Mobile technology and English learning for college students. Australasian Journal of Educational
Technology, 28(5).
Chang, X. J. (2011). Reflection on issues of teaching supervision. Heilongjiang Education (Higher Education
Research & Appraisal), 1, 37–38.
Chen, M. X. (2017). Reflection and practice direction on university teachers’ teaching evaluation.
Heilongjiang Researches on Higher Education, 9, 56–59.
College English Teaching Guide (2017). Steering committee for foreign language teaching in higher institutions.
China: Founded by the Ministry of Education.
Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test.
MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 189–211.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technol-
ogy. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.
Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology inte-
gration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61.
Ertmer, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence,
beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42, 255–284.
Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur, E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and
technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education, 59(2), 423–435.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M. C. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for
research practice. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 4(1), 7.
Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik, S. (2014). Technologies for for-
eign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language
Learning, 27(1), 70–105.
Hair, J. F. Jr, Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). New York,
NY: Prentice Hall.
Hartwick, J., & Barki, H. (1994). Explaining the role of user participation in information system use.
Management Science, 40(4), 440–465.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across
nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications.
Huang, F., & Teo, T. (2020). Influence of teacher-perceived organisational culture and school policy on chi-
nese teachers’ intention to use technology: An extension of technology acceptance model. Educational
Technology Research & Development, 68, 1547–1567.
Huang, F., Teo, T., Sánchez Prieto, J. C., García-Peñalvo, F. J., & Olmos-Migueláñez, S. (2019). Cultural values
and technology adoption: A model comparison with university teachers from China and Spain. Computers
& Education, 133, 69–81.
Huang, F., Teo, T., & Zhou, M. (2019). Factors affecting Chinese English as a foreign language teachers’
technology acceptance: A qualitative study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(1), 83–105.
Huang, F., Teo, T., & Zhou, M. (2020). Chinese students’ intentions to use the Internet for learning.
Educational Technology Research & Development, 68(1), 575–591.
Huang, Y. H., & Chuang, T. Y. (2015). Technology-assisted sheltered instruction: Instructional streaming
video in an EFL multi-purpose computer course. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(3), 618–637.
Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd. ed.) New York, NY: Guilford
Press.
Li, L. (2014). Understanding language teachers’ practice with educational technology: A case from China.
System, 46, 105–119.
Li, L., & Walsh, S. (2011). Technology uptake in Chinese EFL classes. Language Teaching Research, 15(1),
99–125.
Lim, C. P., Chai, C. S., & Churchill, D. (2010). Leading ICT in education practices: A capacity building toolkit for
teacher education institutions in the Asia-Pacific. Singapore, Singapore: Microsoft.
Liu, H., Lin, C. H., & Zhang, D. (2017). Pedagogical beliefs and attitudes toward information and commu-
nication technology: A survey of teachers of English as a foreign language in China. Computer Assisted
Language Learning, 30(8), 745–765.
McKinley, J. (2015). Critical argument and writer identity: Social constructivism as a theoretical framework
for EFL academic writing. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 12(3), 184–207.
Pan, L., & Block, D. (2011). English as a “global language” in China: An investigation into learners’ and
teachers’ language beliefs. System, 39, 391–402.
Perkins, D. N. (1991). What constructivism demands of the learner. Educational Technology, 31(9), 19–21.
Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. (2011). Introduction to psychometric theory. London, UK: Routledge.
Roca, J. C., & Gagné, M. (2008). Understanding e-learning continuance intention in the workplace: A
self-determination theory perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1585–1604.
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press of Glencoe.
Sánchez-Prieto, J. C., Hernández-García, Á., García-Peñalvo, F. J., Chaparro-Peláez, J., & Olmos-Migueláñez,
S. (2019). Break the walls! Second-Order barriers and the acceptance of mLearning by first-year pre-ser-
vice teachers. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 158–167.
Sánchez-Prieto, J. C., Olmos-Migueláñez, S., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2016). Informal tools in formal contexts:
Development of a model to assess the acceptance of mobile technologies among teachers. Computers in
Human Behavior, 55, 519–528.
Sánchez-Prieto, J. C., Olmos-Migueláñez, S., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2017). MLearning and pre-service
teachers: An assessment of the behavioral intention using an expanded TAM model. Computers in Human
Behavior, 72, 644–654.

Sang, G., Valcke, M., Van Braak, J., & Tondeur, J. (2010). Student teachers’ thinking processes and ICT
integration: Predictors of prospective teaching behaviors with educational technology. Computers &
Education, 54(1), 103–112.
Sang, G., Valcke, M., Van Braak, J., Tondeur, J., & Zhu, C. (2011). Predicting ICT integration into classroom
teaching in Chinese primary schools: Exploring the complex interplay of teacher-related variables. Journal
of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 160–172.
Smith, J. (2001). Modeling the social construction of knowledge in ELT teacher education. ELT Journal,
55(3), 221–227.
Surface, E. A., Dierdorff, E. C., & Watson, A. (2007). Special operations language training software measurement
of effectiveness study: Tactical Iraqi study final report. Tampa, FL: Special Operations Forces Language Office.
Tearle, P. (2003). ICT implementation: What makes the difference? British Journal of Educational Technology,
34(5), 567–583.
Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers &
Education, 52(2), 302–312.
Teo, T., Chai, C. S., Hung, D., & Lee, C. B. (2008). Beliefs about teaching and uses of technology among
pre-service teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(2), 163–174.
Teo, T., Huang, F., & Hoi, C. K. W. (2018). Explicating the influences that explain intention to use technology
among English teachers in China. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(4), 460–475.
Tondeur, J., van Keer, H., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). ICT integration in the classroom: Challenging
the potential of a school policy. Computers & Education, 51, 212–223.
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions.
Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four lon-
gitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.
Wang, L., & Coleman, J. A. (2009). A survey of internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education
in china. ReCALL, 21, 113–129.
Warshaw, P. R. (1980). A new model for predicting behavioral intentions: An alternative to Fishbein. Journal
of Marketing Research, 17(2), 153–172.
Yunus, M. M., Salehi, H., & Chenzi, C. (2012). Integrating social networking tools into ESL writing class-
room: Strengths and weaknesses. English Language Teaching, 5(8), 42–48.
APPENDIX
Survey items
Perceived usefulness (PU) (adapted from Davis, 1989).
1. Using technologies will enable me to efficiently use the limited class teaching time.
2. Using technologies will enhance my teaching effectiveness.
3. Using technologies will help students visualise abstract topics.
4. Using technologies will enrich my teaching contents.
5. Using technologies will help attract students’ attention
6. Using technologies is useful in my job.
Perceived ease of use (PEU) (adapted from Davis, 1989).
1. I find it easy to get technologies to do what I want to do.

2. I find computers easy to use.
3. I find technologies easy to learn.
4. I find it easy to be skilful at using technologies.

Behavioural Intention (BI) (adapted from Davis, 1989).
1. I will use technologies in the future.

2. I plan to use technologies often.
3. I will continue to use technologies in the future.
4. I expect that I would use technologies in the future.
5. I am sure I will use technologies in the future.
Subjective norm (SN) (adapted from Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975).
1. People who influence my behaviour think that I should use technologies.

2. People who are important to me think that I should use technologies.
3. Colleagues think that I should use technologies.
4. Faculty leaders think that I should use technologies.
5. School administrators think that I should use technologies.
6. Students think that I should use technologies.
Constructivist teaching beliefs (CTB) (adapted from Teo et al., 2008; Teo et al., 2018).
1. Good teachers always encourage students to think for answers themselves.

2. The focus of teaching is to help students construct knowledge from their learning experience
instead of knowledge delivery.
3. Different objectives and expectations in learning should be applied to different students.
4. Good teachers always make their students feel important.
5. Instruction should be flexible enough to accommodate individual differences among students.
6. It is important that a teacher understands the feelings of the students.
7. Learning means students have ample opportunities to explore, discuss and express their ideas.
Perceived importance of policy (PIP) (adapted from Huang & Teo, 2020).
1. I consider technology-related policy requirement when I prepare for teaching.

2. I follow instruction of technology-related policy requirement when I prepare for teaching.
3. I believe it is important to follow instruction of technology-related policy requirement in
teaching.
4. I believe it is necessary to know about requirements of technology-related policy.
5. I believe it is important to know about requirements of technology-related policy.
6. I keep technology-related policy requirements in mind when I am using technologies.
Computer self-efficacy (CSE) (adapted from Compeau & Higgins, 1995).
1. I could complete a job or task using technologies if I could call someone for help if I
got stuck. (R).
2. I could complete a job or task using technologies if someone showed how to do it first. (R).
3. I could complete a job or task using technologies if I used similar technologies as I used before.
4. I could complete a job or task using computers if I encounter technical difficulties.
5. I could complete a job or task using technologies if they are in good quality.
6. I could complete a job or task if I use my personal technology devices.
7. I could complete a job or task using technologies if I get enough professional training.

Voluntariness (VOL) (adapted from Venkatesh & Davis, 2000).
1. My use of technologies in teaching is voluntary.

2. My leader does not require me to use technologies.
3. Although it might be helpful, using technologies in teaching is totally not compulsory.
4. I have my autonomy in deciding whether to use technologies in teaching.
5. It is acceptable if I do not use technologies in teaching.
6. No one urges/forces me to use technologies in teaching.

Brit J Educational Tech - 2020 - Huang - Examining The Role of Technology Related Policy and Constructivist Teaching Belief

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Brit J Educational Tech - 2020 - Huang - Examining The Role of Technology Related Policy and Constructivist Teaching Belief

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 52 No 1 2021 441–460

Examining the role of technology-related policy and

Fang Huang and Timothy Teo

Keywords: policy, constructivist teaching belief, English teachers, technology

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Research context: Technology integration in EFL teaching in China

Problem statement and research gap

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Aim of the study

Literature review and model development

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Technology acceptance model (TAM)

Hypothesis 2: PEU will have a significant influence on PU.

Hypothesis 3: PEU will have a significant influence on BI.

Subjective norm (SN)

Hypothesis 5: SN will have a significant influence on BI.

Perceived importance of policy (PIP)

Hypothesis 7: PIP will have a significant influence on BI.

Constructivist teaching beliefs (CTB)

Computer self-efficacy (CSE)

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Table 1: Profile of participants (N = 696)

Profile Frequency Mean SD Range

Instruments and procedure

Table 2: Technology tools used in teaching

Computers Digital Multimedia

Number 652 343 322 124 194 388

Table 3: Descriptive statistics of constructs in the study

Construct N of items Mean SD

Perceived usefulness 6 5.82 .83

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Test of moderation effect

Table 4: Factor loadings of the constructs in the study

Constructs Items USE SE CR AVE

PU PU1 1 0.758 0.903 0.609

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Table 5: Square root of AVE and correlation between the constructs

PIOP PU PEU BI SN CTB CSE

Table 6: Results of the hypotheses

Hypotheses Paths Standardised coefficients Results

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Significance and contributions

Limitations and further study

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Statements on open data, ethics and conflict of interest

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Perceived ease of use (PEU) (adapted from Davis, 1989).

1. I find it easy to get technologies to do what I want to do.

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Behavioural Intention (BI) (adapted from Davis, 1989).

1. I will use technologies in the future.

Subjective norm (SN) (adapted from Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975).

1. People who influence my behaviour think that I should use technologies.

1. Good teachers always encourage students to think for answers themselves.

1. I consider technology-related policy requirement when I prepare for teaching.

Computer self-efficacy (CSE) (adapted from Compeau & Higgins, 1995).

© 2020 British Educational Research Association

Voluntariness (VOL) (adapted from Venkatesh & Davis, 2000).

1. My use of technologies in teaching is voluntary.

British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 52 No 1 2021 441–460