Детерминанты эффективности смешанного преподавания-обучения в новых условиях: исследование роли техностресса у преподавателей

Цель данного исследования — проанализировать факторы, определяющие эффективность смешанного типа преподавания и обучения в новой типовой среде посредством изучения техностресса преподавателей. В данном исследовании используется количественный подход. Количественные методы исследования направлены на проверку выдвинутых гипотез. При таком подходе используются числовые показатели переменных, полученные по данным анкет. Был использован метод полной выборки, то есть было опрошено все население, в выборке участвовали учителя старших классов школ Южной Суматры, в результате было получено 712 анкет. В исследовании использовалось моделирование структурными уравнениями (SEM) и интеллектуальное приложение PLS для анализа данных. Согласно результатам исследования, понимание технического и педагогического содержания обучения оказывает положительное влияние на эффективность смешанного обучения и преподавания, а также на уровень техностресса учителей. Собственная эффективность преподавателей положительно влияет на эффективность и результативность процесса смешанного обучения и преподавания, существенно обусловлена наличием техностресса. На уровень техностресса влияет опыт, которым обладает преподаватель. Поддержка администрации и школы положительно сказываются на эффективности смешанного преподавания и обучения, уменьшают уровень техностресса учителей.

1. Chou H.L., Chou C. A multigroup analysis of factors underlying teachers’ technostress and their continuance intention toward online teaching. Comput. Educ., 2021. Vol. 175, p. 104335.
2. Gordeeva T.O., Sychev O.A. Diagnostics of motivating and demotivating styles of teachers: "situations-in-school" questionnaire. Psychol. Sci. Educ., 2021. DOI:10.17759/PSE.2021260103
3. Chodzirin M. Pemanfaatan Information and Communication Technology bagi Pengembangan Guru Madrasah Sub Urban. Dimas J. Pemikir. Agama untuk Pemberdaya., 2016. DOI:10.21580/dms.2016.162.1095
4. Maharani D.P., Hermawan H., Wulandari D.T., Ismawarti N.Y., Kancanadana G., Sayekti I.C. Analis TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) Guru Sekolah Dasar dalam Pembelajaran di Masa Pandemi Covid-19 di Surakarta. J. Basicedu, 2021. DOI:10.31004/basicedu.v5i6.1501
5. Quddus A. Implementasi Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) dalam Pendidikan Profesi Guru (PPG) PAI LPTK UIN Mataram. J. Tatsqif, 2020. DOI:10.20414/jtq.v17i2.1911
6. Mishra P., Koehler M.J. Technological pedagogical content knowledge (tpck): Confronting the wicked problems of teaching with technology. In Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2007, 2007.
7. Wijayanto B. Urgensi technological pedagogical content knowledge (tpack) dalam pembelajaran geografi. J. Geogr., 2017. DOI:10.24036/geografi/vol6-iss1/178
8. Shin T., Koehler M., Mishra P., Schmidt D., Baran E., Thompson A. Changing Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) through Course Experiences. Soc. Inf. Technol. Teach. Educ. Int. Conf., 2009.
9. Suyamto J., Masykuri M., Sarwanto S. Analisis kemampuan tpack (technolgical, pedagogical, and content, knowledge) guru biologi sma dalam menyusun perangkat pembelajaran materi sistem peredaran darah. INKUIRI J. Pendidik. IPA, 2020. DOI:10.20961/inkuiri.v9i1.41381
10. Archakova. Specialists Training for Teachers and Practitioners Working in Early Childhood Care and Education. Psychol. Rev., 2010. Vol. 1.
11. Truzoli R., Pirola V., Conte S. The impact of risk and protective factors on online teaching experience in high school Italian teachers during the COVID19 pandemic. J. Comput. Assist. Learn., 2021. Vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 940–952.
12. Corry M., Stella J. Teacher self-efficacy in online education: a review of the literature. 2018.
13. Shafie H., Majid F.A., Ismail I.S. Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in teaching 21st century skills in the 21st century classroom. Asian J. Univ. Educ., 2019. Vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 24–33.
14. Tseng J.J., Chai C.S., Tan L., Park M. A critical review of research on technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) in language teaching. Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn., 2020, pp. 1–24. DOI:10.1080/09588221.2020.1868531
15. Kabakci Yurdakul I., Odabasi H.F., Kilicer K., Coklar A.N., Birinci G., Kurt A.A. The development, validity and reliability of TPACK-deep: A technological pedagogical content knowledge scale. Comput. Educ., 2012. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.012
16. Bandura A. Self-efficacy-Bandura. Corsini Encycl: Psychol, 2010.
17. Santrock. Life Span Development. Erlangga, 2012.
18. Komarraju M., Nadler D. Self-efficacy and academic achievement: Why do implicit beliefs, goals, and effort regulation matter? Learn. Individ. Differ., 2013. DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2013.01.005
19. Podolsky A., Kini T., Darling-Hammond L. Does teaching experience increase teacher effectiveness? A review of US research. J. Prof. Cap. Community, 2019. Vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 286–308.
20. Yin B., Yuan C.H. Precision teaching and learning performance in a blended learning environment. Frontiers in psychology. Front. Psychol., 2021. Vol. 12.
21. Ghavifekr S., Quan T.Y. Effect of Administration Support on Teachers’ ICT Utilization in the Malaysian Context. Util. Technol. Knowledge, Smart Syst. Educ. Adm. Leadersh., 2020, pp. 282–300.
22. Filinkova E.B., Shulga T.I. Teachers’ Perception of Educational Leadership as a Factor of Readiness for Administrative Positions. Psychol. Sci. Educ., 2018. DOI:10.17759/pse.2018230402
23. Özgür H. Relationships between teachers’ technostress, technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), school support and demographic variables: A structural equation modeling. Comput. Human Behav., 2020. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106468
24. Voet M., De Wever B. Towards a differentiated and domain‐specific view of educational technology: An exploratory study of history teachers’ technology use. Br. J. Educ. Technol., 2017. Vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 1402–1413.
25. Efilti E., Çoklar A.N. Teachers’ Technostress Levels as an Indicator of Their Psychological Capital Levels. Univers. J. Educ. Res., 2019. Vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 413–421.
26. Bliuc A.-M., Goodyear P., Ellis R.A. Research focus and methodological choices in studies into students’ experiences of blended learning in higher education. Internet High. Educ., 2007. Vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 231–244.
27. Wong L., Tatnall A., Burgess S. A framework for investigating blended learning effectiveness. Educ. Train., 2014.
28. Dadhich M., Hiran K.K., Rao S.S. Teaching–Learning Perception Toward Blended E-learning Portals During Pandemic Lockdown. Soft Comput. Theor. Appl., 2021, pp. 119–129.
29. Izuddin S. Pengaruh Blended Learning Terhadap Motivasi dan Prestasi Belajar Siswa SMK. J. Pendidik. Vokasi, 2012.
30. Lukitasari M., Purnamasari I., Utami S., Sukri A. Blended-Problem-Based Learning: How its impact on students’ critical thinking skills? JPBI (Jurnal Pendidik. Biol. Indones.), 2019. Vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 425–434,
31. Uyun M. Prospective Teachers’ Intercultural Sensitivity as the Effort to Actualize the Multicultural Education. AL-ISHLAH J. Pendidik., 2022. Vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 2917–2934,  DOI:10.35445/alishlah.v14i3.1923
32. Ghozali. Ghozali. Uji Koefisien Determinasi. J. Manag. Bus., 2018.
33. Dahri M. Jenis variabel dan skala pengukuran, perbedaan statistik deskriptif dan inferensial. ejournal Prepr., 2017.
34. Huang Z. Theoretical analysis of TPACK knowledge structure of mathematics teachers based on T-TPACK mode. Educ. Sci. Theory Pract., 2018. Vol. 18, no. 5.
35. Gess-Newsome J., Taylor J.A., Carlson J., Gardner A.L., Wilson C.D., Stuhlsatz M.A.M. “Teacher pedagogical content knowledge, practice, and student achievement †,” Int. J. Sci. Educ., 2019. DOI:10.1080/09500693.2016.1265158
36. Khoza S.B., Biyela A.T. Decolonising technological pedagogical content knowledge of first year mathematics students. Educ. Inf. Technol., 2020. DOI:10.1007/s10639-019-10084-4
37. Tondeur J., Scherer R., Siddiq F., Baran E. Enhancing pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): a mixed-method study. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., 2020. DOI:10.1007/s11423-019-09692-1
38. Mohamed Z., Valcke M., De Wever B. Are they ready to teach? Student teachers’ readiness for the job with reference to teacher competence frameworks. J. Educ. Teach., 2017. DOI:10.1080/02607476.2016.1257509
39. Dong Y., Xu C., Chai C.S., Zhai X. Exploring the structural relationship among teachers’ technostress, technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), computer self-efficacy and school support. Asia-Pacific Educ. Res., 2020. Vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 147–157.
40. Magistra S.N., Santosa S., Indriayu M. Effect of Self-Efficacy and Technostress on Teacher Performance through Organizational Commitments. Din. Pendidik., 2021. Vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 75–82.
41. Siddiqui S., Arif I., Hinduja P. Technostress: A catalyst to leave the teaching profession-A survey designed to measure technostress among teachers in Pakistan during COVID-19 pandemic. E-Learning Digit. Media, p. 20427530221107504, 2022.
42. Law K.M.Y., Geng S., Li T. Student enrollment, motivation and learning performance in a blended learning environment: The mediating effects of social, teaching, and cognitive presence. Comput. Educ., 2019. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.02.021
43. Gupta A., Ong Y.S., Feng L. Insights on Transfer Optimization: Because Experience is the Best Teacher. IEEE Trans. Emerg. Top. Comput. Intell., 2018. DOI:10.1109/TETCI.2017.2769104