Educators’ Adoption of Green Digital Technologies: The Role of Psychological Readiness, Digital Competence, and Institutional Support
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58905/athena.v3i4.464Keywords:
Green digital technology, Psychological Readiness, Digital Competence, Institutional Support, TAM, TPACK, SustainabilityAbstract
The growing emphasis on sustainability within education requires teachers to integrate environmentally responsible technologies in their teaching practices. This study examines educators’ adoption of green digital technologies by exploring the influence of psychological readiness, digital competence, and institutional support. Grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, the research develops a conceptual model that connects individual readiness with professional and institutional enablers. Using a cross-sectional design and data from 200 educators in Indonesia, the findings demonstrate that digital competence and institutional support significantly influence sustainable technology adoption, with psychological readiness acting as a mediator. This study highlights the importance of aligning technological innovation with sustainability goals and provides implications for teacher professional development, institutional policy, and sustainable education strategies.
References
Bappenas, “Green Recovery Roadmap Indonesia 2021-2024,” pp. 1–60, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://lcdi-indonesia.id/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Green-Recovery-Roadmap-REV-10-Oct-lowres.pdf
J. Tondeur, J. van Braak, P. A. Ertmer, and A. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, “Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: a systematic review of qualitative evidence,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 555–575, 2017, doi: 10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2.
E. Skantz-Åberg, A. Lantz-Andersson, M. Lundin, and P. Williams, “Teachers’ professional digital competence: an overview of conceptualisations in the literature,” Cogent Educ., vol. 9, no. 1, 2022, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2022.2063224.
H. Al-Awidi and F. Aldhafeeri, “Teachers’ readiness to implement digital,” J. Inf. Technol. Educ., vol. 16, pp. 105–126, 2017.
T. Teo, “Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers,” Comput. Educ., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 302–312, 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006.
C. Redecker, European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union, 2017. doi: 10.2760/178382.
M. Shahzad, Y. Qu, S. U. Rehman, and A. U. Zafar, “Adoption of green innovation technology to accelerate sustainable development among manufacturing industry,” J. Innov. Knowl., vol. 7, no. 4, p. 100231, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2022.100231.
Davis, “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 319–339, 1989, doi: 10.2307/249008.
P. Mishra and M. J. Koehler, “Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge,” Teach. Coll. Rec. Voice Scholarsh. Educ., vol. 108, no. 6, pp. 1017–1054, 2006, doi: 10.1177/016146810610800610.
M. et al. Ilomäki, L., Paavola, S., Lakkala, “Digital competence – an emergent boundary concept for policy and educational research,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 21, pp. 655–679, 2016, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9346-4.
O. E. Hatlevik and K. A. Christophersen, “Digital competence at the beginning of upper secondary school: Identifying factors explaining digital inclusion,” Comput. Educ., vol. 63, pp. 240–247, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.015.
P. A. Ertmer and A. T. Ottenbreit-Leftwich, “Teacher Technology Change,” J. Res. Technol. Educ., vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 255–284, 2010, doi: 10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551.
J. D. Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, Research Design. SAGE Publications, Inc, 2017.
J. F. Hair, J. J. Risher, M. Sarstedt, and C. M. Ringle, “When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM,” Eur. Bus. Rev., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 2–24, 2019, doi: 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203.
S. Getenet, C. Haeusler, P. Redmond, R. Cantle, and V. Crouch, “Bridging the digital divide: gender and learning mode impacts on pre-service teacher digital competence and online engagement,” Irish Educ. Stud., vol. 3315, no. May, pp. 1–17, 2024, doi: 10.1080/03323315.2024.2359694.
L. J. Cronbach, “Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.,” Psychometrika, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 297–334., 1951.
M. Allen, S. Titsworth, and S. Hunt, “ONEWAY Analysis of Variance,” Quant. Res. Commun., pp. 51–70, 2013, doi: 10.4135/9781452274881.n4.
World Medical Association, Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. 2013. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cain.2015.06.002.
V. Yellapu, “Descriptive statistics,” Int. J. Acad. Med., no. April 2018, 2019, doi: 10.4103/IJAM.IJAM.
I. H. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, Psychometric theory, 3 rd. McGraw-Hill., 1994.
T. K. Dijkstra and J. Henseler, “Consistent partial least squares path modeling,” MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst., vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 297–316, 2015, doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.2.02.
D. F. Fornell, C., & Larcker, “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error,” J. Mark. Res., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 39–50, 1981, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104.
J. Henseler, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt, “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 115–135, 2015, doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
J. Cohen, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Routledge, 1988. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587.
D. T. K. Ng, J. K. L. Leung, J. Su, R. C. W. Ng, and S. K. W. Chu, “Teachers’ AI digital competencies and twenty-first century skills in the post-pandemic world,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 137–161, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11423-023-10203-6.
A. R. Althubyani, “Digital Competence of Teachers and the Factors Affecting Their Competence Level: A Nationwide Mixed-Methods Study,” Sustain. , vol. 16, no. 7, 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16072796.
M. J. Koehler, P. Mishra, and W. Cain, “What is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK)?,” J. Educ., vol. 193, no. 3, pp. 13–19, 2013, doi: 10.1177/002205741319300303.
S. Baena-Morales, R. Martinez-Roig, and M. J. Hernádez-Amorós, “Sustainability and educational technology— A description of the teaching self-concept,” Sustain., vol. 12, no. 24, pp. 1–20, 2020, doi: 10.3390/su122410309.
Y. Redecker C. & Punie, “European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Luxembourg:,” 2017.
A. Mahmood, M. Imran, and K. Adil, “Modeling Individual Beliefs to Transfigure Technology Readiness into Technology Acceptance in Financial Institutions,” SAGE Open, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2023, doi: 10.1177/21582440221149718.
L. Sharma, N. Kaushik, M. Maggon, and B. Sivathanu, “Cognitive and cultural factors in metaverse acceptance: A TAM-based meta-analysis,” Acta Psychol. (Amst)., vol. 254, no. March, p. 104855, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.104855.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Harisa Mardiana
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
