How prospective teachers’ educational philosophies shape their digital self-efficacy, the role of resistance to change
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22437154 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Muhammad Akhtar Kang (0000-0002-3082-4786, Hamdard University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Publication date | 2026-06-11 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Discover Education (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2731-5525 • E-ISSN: 2731-5525 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s44217-026-01779-1 |
| OpenAlex | W7164335697 |
| Language | EN |
This study explored the role prospective teacher’s educational philosophies play on their digital self–efficacy and the mediating relationship of resistance to change. From a quantitative perspective, it measured these complex relationships using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). Data were collected through the use of questionnaires completed by a random sample of 162 Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) students (79 public sector, 83 private sector) whilst studying at various universities in Karachi where philosophies of education, resistance to change, and digital self-efficacy were measured. Data were analysed using SPSS and Smart-PLS software. The findings indicate that contemporary educational philosophies were positively associated with digital self-efficacy, whereas conventional philosophies showed a weaker association. Resistance to change did not mediate the relationship between educational philosophies and digital self-efficacy. A small but statistically significant moderation association of resistance to change was observed for one relationship, while other moderation links were not supported. Demographic variables showed limited predictive value and did not substantially alter the observed relationships.
Bachelor · Higher education · Moderation · Structural equation modeling · Digital literacy in education · Impact of Technology on Adolescents · Technostress in Professional Settings
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |