Exploring the intention‐behavior gap in the technology acceptance model: A mixed‐methods study in the context of foreign‐language teaching in China

Abstract

AbstractThis study explored the strength and mechanisms of the intention‐use link in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), based on data from a sample of 198 in‐service college‐level foreign‐language teachers in China. Its sequential explanatory research design involved, firstly, a quantitative approach to examine the structural relations among the TAM's variables, using path analysis on survey data; and secondly, qualitative interviews with a purposive sub‐sample of 16 of the same teachers, aimed at identifying potential influences on the intention‐behavior gap in their student‐centered technology use. Analysis of the quantitative data indicated a significant relationship between the teachers' intention to use technology and their teacher‐centered technology use of technology, but a non‐significant relationship between intention to use technology and their student‐centered technology use. The qualitative data revealed that facilitating conditions, prior experience with technology and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) were the main obstacles to the interviewees' student‐centered technology use. Other factors also played a role in educators' intention‐use gaps, including habit, beliefs in students, Chinese teaching culture and assessment pressure. Practitioner NotesWhat is already known about this topic TAM has been supported by a multitude of studies. Previous findings on intention‐behavior linkage in TAM are inconclusive. Foreign language teachers' student‐centered technology use is limited. What this paper adds It conceptualizes two levels of technology use behavior using TAM as framework. It identifies an intention‐behavior gap in student‐centered technology use. It explores external and internal constraints to student‐centered technology use. Implications for practice and/or policy Educational institutions need to facilitate teachers' student‐centered technology use. Consistent training on integrating student‐centered technology use with teaching content are in need.