Cited by 164Mobile Learning in EducationTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourEnglish Language Learning and Teaching

Examining EFL teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and the adoption of mobile-assisted language learning: A partial least square approach

Hsu, Liwei·2016·Computer Assisted Language Learning

Abstract

This study examines EFL (English as a foreign Language) teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) and how such knowledge affects the adoption of mobile-assisted language learning (MALL). A total of 158 in-service Taiwanese English teachers were surveyed. Two frameworks were employed to examine latent constructs: TPACK and the technology acceptance model (TAM). Descriptive statistics showed that among TPACK variables, technological pedagogical knowledge possessed the highest mean score. In terms of TAM, EFL teachers scored continuous usage (CU) highest, therefore implying that they were keen to use MALL in their lessons. The partial least square approach was applied to identify structural relationships between the proposed variables; it revealed that TPACK significantly affected both perceived ease of use (PEU) and perceived usefulness (PU). Furthermore, PEU significantly affected PU, which was shown to have a significant effect on both attitude toward use (ATU) and CU. The mediation effects of PU on the relationship between PEU and ATU, as well as CU, were also confirmed. Hence, TPACK was critical to MALL's adoption, and its PU was pivotal to teachers’ attitudes toward and continued use of it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09588221.2016.1278024

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 83 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hsu, L.
Affiliations
National Kaohsiung University of Hospitality and Tourism (TW)
Corresponding author
Hsu, Liwei
Venue
Computer Assisted Language Learning
Published
2016-11-16
Volume
29
Issue
8
Pages
1287-1297
ISSN
  • 0958-8221 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-3210
OpenAlex
W2578039676
Cited by
164
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3
FWCI
16.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computer Assisted Language Learning (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (105-2511-S-328-001-MY2)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Mobile Learning in Education
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
Keywords
technological pedagogical content knowledge, TPACK, mobile-assisted language learning, technology acceptance model, EFL teachers, in-service teachers, perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude toward using, technology adoption, mediating effect

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review