MODEL KONSEPTUAL KOMPETENSI PENGAJARAN DIGITAL PENSYARAH KPTM BERASASKAN TEORI KOGNITIF SOSIAL DAN DIGCOMPEDU
A CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF DIGITAL TEACHING COMPETENCE AMONG KPTM LECTURERS BASED ON SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY AND DIGCOMPEDU
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJEPC.1164039Keywords:
DigCompEdu, Efikasi Kendiri (Self-Efficacy), Kompetensi Pengajaran Digital (Digital Teaching Competence), Pengaplikasian Alat Digital (Digital Tool Application), Sokongan Institusi (Institutional Support), Teori Kognitif Sosial (Social Cognitive Theory)Abstract
Kewujudan teknologi dan kemudahan digital di institusi pendidikan tinggi tidak semestinya menghasilkan pengajaran digital yang berkesan. Keberkesanannya turut dipengaruhi oleh keyakinan pensyarah, sokongan institusi dan cara alat digital diaplikasikan dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran. Walaupun kompetensi digital pensyarah telah dikaji dalam pelbagai konteks institusi pendidikan tinggi awam dan swasta, dapatan tersebut tidak boleh digeneralisasikan secara langsung kepada KPTM kerana perbezaan populasi, tahap pengajian, bidang program dan persekitaran kerja. Artikel konseptual ini mencadangkan model yang menghubungkan Efikasi Kendiri (EK), Sokongan Institusi (SI), Pengaplikasian Alat Digital (PAD) dan Kompetensi Pengajaran Digital (KPD) dalam kalangan pensyarah KPTM. Model ini dirumus melalui integrasi Teori Kognitif Sosial dan DigCompEdu serta sintesis kajian terdahulu berkaitan keempat-empat konstruk. Literatur menunjukkan bahawa hubungan EK, SI dan KPD lebih kerap diteliti secara langsung, manakala PAD sebagai pengantara tingkah laku masih kurang diberikan perhatian. Berdasarkan Teori Kognitif Sosial, EK mewakili faktor personal, SI mewakili faktor persekitaran dan PAD mewakili tingkah laku pensyarah mengaplikasikan alat digital bagi menyokong penglibatan pembelajaran secara pasif, aktif, konstruktif dan interaktif. KPD pula dihuraikan berdasarkan enam bidang DigCompEdu. PAD dicadangkan sebagai pengantara untuk menjelaskan bagaimana keyakinan pensyarah dan sokongan institusi diterjemahkan kepada pengaplikasian alat digital sebelum dikaitkan dengan KPD. Jika disokong secara empirikal, model ini boleh membantu KPTM mengenal pasti sama ada keperluan pembangunan pensyarah lebih berkaitan dengan keyakinan, sokongan institusi, pengaplikasian alat digital atau bidang tertentu dalam KPD. Hubungan yang dicadangkan masih perlu diuji dan tidak boleh ditafsirkan sebagai bukti sebab-akibat.
Digital technology alone does not ensure effective teaching in higher education; effective use also depends on lecturers' confidence, institutional support, and the way digital tools are applied. Although lecturers' digital competence has been examined across public and private higher education settings, the findings cannot be directly generalised to KPTM because the populations, programme levels, fields of study, and work environments differ. This conceptual article proposes a model linking Self-Efficacy (SE), Institutional Support (IS), Digital Tool Application (DTA), and Digital Teaching Competence (DTC) among KPTM lecturers. The model integrates Social Cognitive Theory and DigCompEdu and draws on studies of the four constructs. Prior research has more often examined direct relationships among SE, IS, and DTC, with less attention to DTA as a behavioural mediator. In the model, SE represents the personal factor, IS the environmental factor, and DTA lecturers' behaviour in applying digital tools to support passive, active, constructive, and interactive learning engagement. DTC is described through the six DigCompEdu areas. DTA is proposed to explain how lecturers' confidence and institutional support are translated into digital tool application before being associated with DTC. If empirically supported, the model may help KPTM identify whether lecturers' professional development needs relate more closely to confidence, institutional support, digital tool application, or particular areas of DTC. The proposed relationships require empirical testing and should not be interpreted as evidence of causality.
Downloads
References
Amenda, A., Adanan, M., Sumarno, S., & Suarman, S. (2026). Teacher self-efficacy and technology-integrated pedagogy: Mediating roles of motivation and ICT [Version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. F1000Research, 15, 695. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.179525.1
Antonietti, C., Schmitz, M.-L., Consoli, T., Cattaneo, A., Gonon, P., & Petko, D. (2023). Development and validation of the ICAP Technology Scale to measure how teachers integrate technology into learning activities. Computers & Education, 192, 104648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104648
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Basilotta-Gómez-Pablos, V., Matarranz, M., Casado-Aranda, L.-A., & Otto, A. (2022). Teachers' digital competencies in higher education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19, Article 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00312-8
Bolliger, D. U., Inan, F. A., & Wasilik, O. (2014). Development and validation of the Online Instructor Satisfaction Measure (OISM). Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 183–195. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.17.2.183
Cabero-Almenara, J., Guillén-Gámez, F. D., Ruiz-Palmero, J., & Palacios-Rodríguez, A. (2021). Digital competence of higher education professor according to DigCompEdu: Statistical research methods with ANOVA between fields of knowledge in different age ranges. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 4691–4708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10476-5
Cabero-Almenara, J., Gutiérrez-Castillo, J. J., Palacios-Rodríguez, A., & Barroso-Osuna, J. (2020). Development of the Teacher Digital Competence: Validation of DigCompEdu Check-In questionnaire in the university context of Andalusia (Spain). Sustainability, 12(15), 6094. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156094
Caena, F., & Redecker, C. (2019). Aligning teacher competence frameworks to 21st century challenges: The case for the European Digital Competence Framework for Educators (DigCompEdu). European Journal of Education, 54(3), 356–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12345
Cattaneo, A. A. P., Antonietti, C., & Rauseo, M. (2022). How digitalised are vocational teachers? Assessing digital competence in vocational education and looking at its underlying factors. Computers & Education, 176, 104358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104358
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Falloon, G. (2020). From digital literacy to digital competence: The teacher digital competency (TDC) framework. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 2449–2472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09767-4
García-Ruiz, R., Buenestado-Fernández, M., & Ramírez-Montoya, M. S. (2023). Assessment of digital teaching competence: Instruments, results and proposals. Systematic literature review. Educación XX1, 26(1), 273–301. https://doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.33520
Ghomi, M., & Redecker, C. (2019). Digital competence of educators (DigCompEdu): Development and evaluation of a self-assessment instrument for teachers' digital competence. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2019), Volume 1 (pp. 541–548). SciTePress. https://doi.org/10.5220/0007679005410548
Haarala-Muhonen, A., Myyry, L., Pyörälä, E., Kallunki, V., Anttila, H., Katajavuori, N., Kinnunen, P., & Tuononen, T. (2023). The impact of pedagogical and ICT training in teachers' approaches to online teaching and use of digital tools. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1223665. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1223665
Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Inamorato dos Santos, A., Chinkes, E., Carvalho, M. A. G., Solórzano, C. M. V., & Marroni, L. S. (2023). The digital competence of academics in higher education: Is the glass half empty or half full? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20, Article 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00376-0
Kementerian Pendidikan Tinggi Malaysia. (2025). Pelan Tindakan Pendigitalan Pendidikan Tinggi 2025–2030. https://www.mohe.gov.my/muat-turun/penerbitan-jurnal-dan-laporan/pelan-tindakan-pendigitalan-pendidikan-tinggi-2025-2030
Kolej Poly-Tech MARA Sdn. Bhd. (n.d.-a). Kampus. Retrieved August 27, 2026, from https://www.kptm.edu.my/kampus/
Kolej Poly-Tech MARA Sdn. Bhd. (n.d.-b). Sejarah KPTM. Retrieved August 27, 2026, from https://www.kptm.edu.my/sejarah-kptm/
Liu, J. Q., Noordin, M. K., Azmi, M. A., Md Nasir, A. N., & Arsat, M. (2024). Digital competencies for TVET educators: A framework for professional development. Akademika, 94(3), 144–160. https://doi.org/10.17576/akad-2024-9403-09
Lohr, A., Stadler, M., Schultz-Pernice, F., Chernikova, O., Sailer, M., Fischer, F., & Sailer, M. (2021). On powerpointers, clickerers, and digital pros: Investigating the initiation of digital learning activities by teachers in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 119, 106715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106715
Masdoki, M., Din, R., & Mohd Matore, M. E. E. (2024). Towards Educator 4.0: Technology competency-based teaching. Jurnal Pendidikan, 49(1), 21–29. https://doi.org/10.17576/JPEN-2024-49.01-03
Naim, S. (2025). ESL lecturers' digital competence and organizational support and their effect on pedagogical digital competence. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 15(11), 2347–2357. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2025.15.11.2430
Niederhauser, D. S., & Perkmen, S. (2008). Validation of the Intrapersonal Technology Integration Scale: Assessing the influence of intrapersonal factors that influence technology integration. Computers in the Schools, 25(1–2), 98–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380560802157956
Ozan, Ö., & Özarslan, Y. (2025). Investigating factors influencing faculty members' digital competence for capacity building on open and distance education in HEIs. Open Praxis, 17(2), 363–375. https://doi.org/10.55982/openpraxis.17.2.775
Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu (Y. Punie, Ed.). Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/159770
Ulfert-Blank, A.-S., & Schmidt, I. (2022). Assessing digital self-efficacy: Review and scale development. Computers & Education, 191, 104626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104626
Wang, Z., & Chu, Z. (2023). Examination of higher education teachers' self-perception of digital competence, self-efficacy, and facilitating conditions: An empirical study in the context of China. Sustainability, 15(14), 10945. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15141094
