American Journal of Education and Information Technology


Submit a Manuscript

Publishing with us to make your research visible to the widest possible audience.

Propose a Special Issue

Building a community of authors and readers to discuss the latest research and develop new ideas.

Investigating Teachers' Acceptance of Techno-Pedagogy in a Competency-Based Curriculum: A UTAUT Model Analysis

Technology has become an increasingly essential component of education in recent years, and many nations have embraced pedagogical techniques that incorporate technology in a variety of educational contexts. However, instructors in Uganda have shown reluctance to accept such practices, posing a danger to their relevance in technology-oriented classrooms. We used the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model to evaluate the acceptance and use of techno-pedagogy in a competency-based teaching and learning environment to examine the variables that impact Ugandan teachers' acceptance and use of techno-pedagogy. We also utilized the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) paradigm to create the techno-pedagogical competence construct, which was used to assess teachers' grasp of how to successfully incorporate technology into their teaching practice. We investigated five hypotheses about these determinants and gathered data from 245 instructors who were putting the redesigned lower secondary curriculum into practice. To evaluate the data and investigate the correlations between the variables, structural equation modelling was utilized. Our results imply that Behavioral Intention is highly influenced by Performance Expectancy and Facilitating Conditions, which in turn is a key contributor to the use of technology for teaching. Effort Expectancy and Social impact, on the other hand, had no substantial impact on Behavioral Intention. These findings emphasize the necessity of providing enough technical tools, training, and support to teachers to improve the acceptance and application of techno-pedagogy in Ugandan classrooms. Our work adds to the literature on techno-pedagogy acceptability and has substantial policy and practice implications in Uganda and in comparable situations.

Techno-Pedagogy, CBC Curriculum, Competency-Based Learning, UTAUT Model

Tibakanya Joseph. (2023). Investigating Teachers' Acceptance of Techno-Pedagogy in a Competency-Based Curriculum: A UTAUT Model Analysis. American Journal of Education and Information Technology, 7(2), 59-70.

Copyright © 2023 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License ( which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1. Gloria R, Benjamin AE. ATTITUDE OF TEACHERS TOWARDS TECHNO-PEDAGOGY. Int J Eng Technol Manag Res. 2020 Feb 26; 5 (4): 87–9.
2. Lyonga NAN, Moluayonge GE, Nkeng AJ. A Study of Techno-Pedagogical Skills and Teachers’ Performance in HTTTC Kumba, Cameroon. Eur J Educ Pedagogy. 2021 Jan 30; 2 (1): 46–50.
3. Sholihatin E, Swasti IK, Sukirmiyadi S, Hayati KR. Development of techno-pedagogy approach learning model to improve digital literation of UPN “Veteran” Jawa Timur’s students. Int J Educ Vocat Stud. 2021 Aug 30; 3 (4): 297.
4. Guru N, Beura MK. Techno-pedagogical competency of higher secondary school teachers in relation to students’ academic achievement in science. Int J Appl Res. 2019; 5 (12): 362–70.
5. Asad MM, Aftab K, Sherwani F, Churi P, Moreno-Guerrero AJ, Pourshahian B. Techno-Pedagogical Skills for 21st Century Digital Classrooms: An Extensive Literature Review. Namaziandost E, editor. Educ Res Int. 2021 Dec 30; 2021: 1–12.
6. Terzi̇ R. The impact of understanding learners and techno-pedagogical competency on effective learning environments by designing the instructional process. Turk J Educ. 2020 Jul 31; 242–55.
7. Bala P, Tao I. An examination of techno-pedagogical competence and anxiety towards the use of instructional aids in teaching among senior secondary school teachers. Int Educ J Chetana. 2018; 3 (3): 95–114.
8. Vasquez JA, Marcotte K, Gruppen LD. The parallel evolution of competency-based education in medical and higher education. J Competency-Based Educ. 2021; 6 (2): e1234.
9. Levine E, Patrick S. What Is Competency-Based Education? An Updated Definition. Aurora Inst. 2019.
10. Ndihokubwayo K, Habiyaremye HT. Why did Rwanda shift from knowledge to competence based curriculum? Syllabuses and textbooks point of view. Afr Res Rev. 2018 Sep 10; 12 (3): 38.
11. Baluku E, Kasujja JP. ICT Usage in Teaching and its Influence on Student’s Academic Performance in Uganda Certificate of Education (UCE) in Kasese District. 2020.
12. Keirungi J. Teachers’ perceptions on the use of information and Communication technology in the teaching of deaf learners: a case of two primary schools in Kampala capital city, Uganda. 2021.
13. Ssenyonga R, Sewankambo NK, Mugagga SK, Nakyejwe E, Chesire F, Mugisha M, et al. Learning to think critically about health using digital technology in Ugandan lower secondary schools: A contextual analysis. Plos One. 2022; 17 (2): e0260367.
14. Teng Z, Cai Y, Gao Y, Zhang X, Li X. Factors Affecting Learners’ Adoption of an Educational Metaverse Platform: An Empirical Study Based on an Extended UTAUT Model. Shin J, editor. Mob Inf Syst. 2022 Aug 26; 2022: 1–15.
15. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q. 2003; 425–78.
17. Almisad B, Alsalim M. Kuwaiti female university students’ acceptance of the integration of smartphones in their learning: an investigation guided by a modified version of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). Int J Technol Enhanc Learn. 2020; 12 (1): 1–19.
18. Raza SA, Qazi Z, Qazi W, Ahmed M. E-learning in higher education during COVID-19: evidence from blackboard learning system. J Appl Res High Educ. 2022; 14 (4): 1603–22.
19. Jane A, Dinah W, Irene A. The teacher-parent nexus in the competency based curriculum success equation in Kenya. Int J Educ Adm Policy Stud. 2020 Feb 29; 12 (1): 60–76.
20. Kanyonga L, Mtana N, Wendt H. Implementation of competence-based curriculum in technical colleges: The case of Arusha City, Tanzania. Int J Vocat Tech Educ. 2019; 11 (1): 1–20.
21. Mulenga IM, Kabombwe YM. A competency-based curriculum for Zambian primary and secondary schools: Learning from theory and some countries around the world. 2019.
22. Akinrinola F. Competency-Based Education in Africa: Exploring Teachers’ Perceptions, Understanding, and Practices. 2021.
23. Ruth C, Ramadas V. The “Africanized” Competency-Based Curriculum: The Twenty-First Century Strides. Shanlax Int J Educ. 2019 Sep 1; 7 (4): 46–51.
24. Kabombwe YM, Machila N, Sikayomya P. Implementing a History Competency-Based Curriculum: Teaching and Learning Activities for a Zambian School History Classroom. 2020; 3 (3).
25. Gervais J. The operational definition of competency-based education. J Competency-Based Educ. 2016; 1 (2): 98–106.
26. Brilingaite A, Bukauskas L, Juškeviciene A. Competency assessment in problem-based learning projects of information technologies students. Inform Educ. 2018; 17 (1): 21–44.
27. Williams P. Does competency-based education with blockchain signal a new mission for universities? J High Educ Policy Manag. 2019; 41 (1): 104–17.
28. Haris I, Pulukadang WT, Husain R, Ilham A, Abdullah G. Improving the Quality of Competency-Based Assessment through a Classroom Training Activity. 2021; 45 (2).
29. Şentürk Ş, Uçar HT, Gümüş İ, Diksoy İ. The relationship between individual innovativeness and techno-pedagogical levels of school administrators and teachers. Educ Q Rev. 2021; 4.
31. Castéra J, Marre CC, Yok MCK, Sherab K, Impedovo MA, Sarapuu T, et al. Self-reported TPACK of teacher educators across six countries in Asia and Europe. Educ Inf Technol. 2020 Jul; 25 (4): 3003–19.
32. Ammade S, Mahmud M, Jabu B, Tahmir S. TPACK Model Based Instruction in Teaching Writing: An Analysis on TPACK Literacy. Int J Lang Educ. 2020 Mar 30; 129–40.
33. Shulman LS. Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educ Res. 1986; 15 (2): 4–14.
34. Mishra P, Koehler MJ. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teach Coll Rec. 2006; 108 (6): 1017–54.
35. Laxim V, Gure GS. Techno-Pedagogy, Practices in Teacher Education. Int J Enhanc Res Educ Dev. 2016; 4 (6): 33–40.
36. Cheng PH, Molina J, Lin MC, Liu HH, Chang CY. A New TPACK Training Model for Tackling the Ongoing Challenges of COVID-19. Appl Syst Innov. 2022 Feb 25; 5 (2): 32.
37. Schmid M, Brianza E, Petko D. Developing a short assessment instrument for Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK.xs) and comparing the factor structure of an integrative and a transformative model. Comput Educ. 2020 Nov; 157: 103967.
38. Lavidas K, Katsidima MA, Theodoratou S, Komis V, Nikolopoulou K. Preschool teachers’ perceptions about TPACK in Greek educational context. J Comput Educ. 2021 Sep; 8 (3): 395–410.
39. Salas-Rueda RA. TPACK: Technological, Pedagogical and Content Model Necessary to Improve the Educational Process on Mathematics through a Web Application? Int Electron J Math Educ [Internet]. 2019 Aug 21 [cited 2023 Feb 27]; 1 (1). Available from:
40. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 1989; 319–40.
41. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. 1977.
42. Perienen A. Frameworks for ICT Integration in Mathematics Education - A Teacher’s Perspective. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ [Internet]. 2020 Feb 21 [cited 2023 Feb 15]; 16 (6). Available from:
43. Wijaya TT, Cao Y, Weinhandl R, Yusron E, Lavicza Z. Applying the UTAUT Model to Understand Factors Affecting Micro-Lecture Usage by Mathematics Teachers in China. Mathematics. 2022 Mar 22; 10 (7): 1008.
44. Boonsiritomachai W, Pitchayadejanant K. Determinants affecting mobile banking adoption by generation Y based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model modified by the Technology Acceptance Model concept. Kasetsart J Soc Sci. 2019; 40 (2): 349–58.
45. Abbad MMM. Using the UTAUT model to understand students’ usage of e-learning systems in developing countries. Educ Inf Technol. 2021 Nov; 26 (6): 7205–24.
46. Al-Mamary YHS. Understanding the use of learning management systems by undergraduate university students using the UTAUT model: Credible evidence from Saudi Arabia. Int J Inf Manag Data Insights. 2022 Nov; 2 (2): 100092.
47. Mishra A, Baker-Eveleth L, Gala P, Stachofsky J. Factors influencing actual usage of fitness tracking devices: Empirical evidence from the UTAUT model. Health Mark Q. 2021 Oct 31; 1–20.
48. Kim J, Lee KSS. Conceptual model to predict Filipino teachers’ adoption of ICT-based instruction in class: using the UTAUT model. Asia Pac J Educ. 2022; 42 (4): 699–713.
50. Abd Rahman SF, Md Yunus M, Hashim H. Applying UTAUT in Predicting ESL Lecturers Intention to Use Flipped Learning. Sustainability. 2021 Jul 31; 13 (15): 8571.
51. Mohammad-Salehi B, Vaez-Dalili M, Heidari Tabrizi H. Investigating Factors That Influence EFL Teachers’ Adoption of Web 2.0 Technologies: Evidence from Applying the UTAUT and TPACK. TESL-EJ. 2021; 25 (1): n1.
52. Raffaghelli JE, Rodríguez ME, Guerrero-Roldán AE, Bañeres D. Applying the UTAUT model to explain the students’ acceptance of an early warning system in Higher Education. Comput Educ. 2022 Jun; 182: 104468.
54. Cheung G, Wan K, Chan K. Efficient Use of Clickers: A Mixed-Method Inquiry with University Teachers. Educ Sci. 2018 Mar 1; 8 (1): 31.
55. Almaiah MA, Alamri MM, Al-Rahmi W. Applying the UTAUT Model to Explain the Students’ Acceptance of Mobile Learning System in Higher Education. IEEE Access. 2019; 7: 174673–86.
56. Pyneandee M. The Adoption of Web 2.0 Tools in Teaching and Learning by In-service Secondary School Teachers: The Mauritian Context.
57. Tech-integration in Vocational Business English Teaching: A Review. High Educ Orient Stud [Internet]. 2022 May 31 [cited 2023 Apr 11]; 2 (3). Available from:
58. Buabeng-Andoh C. Predicting students’ intention to adopt mobile learning: A combination of theory of reasoned action and technology acceptance model. J Res Innov Teach Learn. 2018 Nov 28; 11 (2): 178–91.
59. Collier JE. Applied structural equation modeling using AMOS: Basic to advanced techniques. Routledge; 2020.
60. Rafique H, Almagrabi AO, Shamim A, Anwar F, Bashir AK. Investigating the Acceptance of Mobile Library Applications with an Extended Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Comput Educ. 2020 Feb; 145: 103732.
61. Van Ginkel JR, Linting M, Rippe RC, van der Voort A. Rebutting existing misconceptions about multiple imputation as a method for handling missing data. J Pers Assess. 2020; 102 (3): 297–308.
62. Enders CK. Applied missing data analysis. Guilford Publications; 2022.