[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-600450-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-600450-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","factors-influencing-technology-integration-among-mathematics-educators-in-south-africa-a-modified-utaut2-perspective","Factors influencing technology integration among mathematics educators in South Africa: A modified UTAUT2 perspective","","Study examines factors shaping technology integration into teaching among mathematics educators in Gauteng secondary schools in South Africa. Using a modified UTAUT2 framework extended with technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK), data were gathered from 309 educators via an online questionnaire. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses validated the measurement model. Structural equation modelling showed hedonic motivation, performance expectancy, and TPACK affecting behavioral intention, while TPACK, facilitating conditions, effort expectancy, social influence, descriptive norms, and habit influenced behavioral use.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/factors-influencing-technology-integration-among-mathematics-educators-in-south-africa-a-modified-utaut2-perspective/600450/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/factors-influencing-technology-integration-among-mathematics-educators-in-south-africa-a-modified-utaut2-perspective/600450.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"OmBimo","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",9,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What framework guides the study on technology integration for mathematics educators?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The study uses a modified UTAUT2 perspective extended with technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK).","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Which factors influence behavioral intention to integrate technology?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Hedonic motivation, performance expectancy, and TPACK were found to influence behavioral intention.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How do study results rank the most important constructs for technology integration?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"TPACK was the most important construct, with the highest explained variance (64.4%), followed by effort expectancy, facilitating conditions, hedonic motivation, and habit with variances above 50%.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},600450,1792144737,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},962090893581,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","OPEN ACCESS  \nResearch Article  \nContemporary Educational Technology, 2025, 17(2), ep564 ISSN: 1309-517X (Online)  \nFactors influencing technology integration among mathematics educators in South Africa: A modified UTAUT2 perspective  \nAntony Musasa 1  \n 0009-0006-5671-0097  \nJameson Goto 1*  \n 0000-0002-7102-8911  \nGeoffrey Lautenbach 1  \n 0000-0001-7099-095X  \n1 University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, SOUTH AFRICA  \n* Corresponding author: [jgoto@uj.ac.za](jgoto@uj.ac.za)  \nCitation: Musasa, A., Goto, J., & Lautenbach, G. (2025) . Factors influencing technology integration among mathematics educators in South Africa: A modified UTAUT2 perspective. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(2), ep564 .  \n[https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15890](https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15890)  \nARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT  \n\n| Received: 6 Sep 2024\u003Cbr>Accepted: 7 Dec 2024\u003Cbr>INTRODUCTION | Educators must effectively integrate technology into their teaching practices in today’s technology-driven world. This study investigated factors influencing technology integration into teaching among mathematics educators in Gauteng secondary schools in South Africa. The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, extended by adding the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framed the study. Data was collected using an online questionnaire from 309 mathematics educators. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to validate and verify the measurement model. The structural equation modelling analyses indicated that hedonic motivation (HM), performance expectancy (PE) and TPACK influenced behavioral intention (BI) to integrate technology. TPACK, facilitating conditions (FC), effort expectancy (EE), social influence (SIN), descriptive norms (SID) and habit (HT) influenced the behavioral use (BU) of technology integration. The second-order structural modelling indicated that all the constructs contributed to technology integration. Still, TPACK was the most important, with the highest explained variance of 64.4%, followed by EE, FC, HM and HT, which all had explained variances above 50% . BI and BU, PE and social influence contributed less than 50% of the explained variance. Our findings could provide insights into future interventions for effective technology integration for in-service educator training.\u003Cbr>Keywords: TPACK, facilitating conditions, technology integration, effort expectancy, mathematics |\n| --- | --- |\n\nDespite the substantial investments and the provision of digital tools such as interactive whiteboards (IWBs), smartboards, internet-enabled devices and Wi-Fi (Dlamini, 2022) by the Gauteng provincial educational department (Mlambo et al., 2020), many mathematics educators are not effectively integrating these tools into their teaching (Avci, 2022; Graham et al., 2020; Mihai, 2020; Perienen, 2020; Saal & Graham, 2023; Zulu, 2020) . This occurs against a background of low academic achievements in mathematics in South African schools at the national and international levels (Gaillard, 2019; Graham et al., 2021; Reddy et al., 2019) .  \nNotably, the successful integration of technology into teaching is associated with positive or improved learner academic achievement in mathematics learning (Mailizar et al., 2021; Ndlovu & Meyer, 2019) . For instance, interactive technology increases engagement, leading to student motivation (Cirneanu &  \nMoldoveanu, 2024); tools such as graphing calculators and simulations lead to better visualization of complex mathematical concepts (Ozudogru & Ozudogru, 2019; Yildiz & Arpaci, 2024), technology inclusion enhances students’ mathematical reasoning (Yildiz & Arpaci, 2024), problem-solving, and critical thinking skills in the learning of mathematics, leading to positive learning outcomes (Cirneanu & Moldoveanu, 2024; Perienen, 2020) . Consequently, integrating technology into teaching will address South African schools’ current low mathematics achievement. Saal and Graham (2023) att","cbCaiuHS8SxR33fv","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiuHS8SxR33fv","pdf",577266,21,"English","# Introduction\n## Study Framework and Data Collection\n## Measurement and Structural Modeling Results\n## Barriers and Facilitators to Technology Integration","[{\"question\":\"What framework guides the study on technology integration for mathematics educators?\",\"answer\":\"The study uses a modified UTAUT2 perspective extended with technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK).\"},{\"question\":\"Which factors influence behavioral intention to integrate technology?\",\"answer\":\"Hedonic motivation, performance expectancy, and TPACK were found to influence behavioral intention.\"},{\"question\":\"How do study results rank the most important constructs for technology integration?\",\"answer\":\"TPACK was the most important construct, with the highest explained variance (64.4%), followed by effort expectancy, facilitating conditions, hedonic motivation, and habit with variances above 50%.\"}]","Factors influencing technology integration among mathematics educators in South Africa: A modified UTAUT2 perspective | PDF",1792090717,53]