Construction, factor structure and reliability of an instrument to investigate teachers’ perceptions and attitudes towards the use of digital technologies in teaching


  • Laura Carlotta Foschi Department of Philosophy, Sociology, Education and Applied Psychology (FISPPA), University of Padua



Information and Communication Technology, Educational Technology, Technology Acceptance Model, In-service teachers, Scale development


The paper presents the process of constructing and examining the factor structure and reliability of an instrument (“TECNOINS”) to investigate in-service teachers’ perceptions and attitudes towards the use of digital technologies in teaching. The exploration of the factor structure - in a sample of 165 primary and secondary school teachers - yielded three factors corresponding to the three theoretical constructs considered within the Technology Acceptance Model: attitude, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. In addition, each factor demonstrated reliability estimates in the acceptable to good range of internal consistency and showed adherence to the theoretical constructs. Although some psychometric characteristics remain to be assessed, the instrument “TECNOINS” can represent a valuable research tool for monitoring and evaluating initial and continuous teacher education and training, Action-Research or Training-Research, as well as teaching-technological innovation practices in the school context.


Abdullah, F., & Ward, R. (2016). Developing a General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-Learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors. Computers in human behavior, 56, 238-256.

Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control (pp. 11-39). New York, NY, USA: Springer.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall.

Bandalos, D. L., & Gerstner, J. J. (2016), Using factor analysis in test construction. In K. Schweizer & C. DiStefano (Eds.), Principles and methods of test construction: Standards and recent advances (pp. 26-51). Boston, MA, USA: Hogrefe.

Bartlett, M. S. (1950). Tests of significance in factor analysis. British Journal of Statistical Psychology, 3, 77-85.

Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various χ2 approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological), 16, 296-298.

Baydas, O., & Goktas, Y. (2017). A model for preservice teachers’ intentions to use ICT in future lessons. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(7), 930-945.

Beller, M. (2013). Technologies in large-scale assessments: New directions, challenges, and opportunities. In M. v. Davier, E. Gonzalez, I. Kirsch, & K. Yamamoto (Eds.), The role of international large-scale assessments: Perspectives from technology, economy, and educational research (pp. 25-45). Dordrecht, NL: Springer Science + Business Media.

Berrett, B., Murphy, J., & Sullivan, J. (2012). Administrator insights and reflections: Technology integration in schools. The Qualitative Report, 17(1), 200-221.

Bishop, M. J., & Spector, J. M. (2014). Technology integration. In J. M. Spector, D. Merrill, J. Elen & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed.) (pp. 817-818). New York, NY, USA: Springer Science + Business Media.

Briggs, N. E., & MacCallum, R. C. (2003). Recovery of weak common factors by maximum likelihood and ordinary least squares estimation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38(1), 25-56.

Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). New York, NY, USA: Guilford Press.

Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate behavioral research, 1(2), 245-276.

Child, D. (2006). The essentials of factor analysis (3rd ed.). New York, NY, USA: Continuum.

Chiorri, C. (2011). Teoria e tecnica psicometrica: Costruire un test psicologico. Milano, IT: McGraw-Hill Education.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, MI, USA: Erlbaum.

Commissione Europea (2018). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions “on the Digital Education Action Plan”. Retrieved from

Commissione Europea (2020). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions “on achieving the European Education Area by 2025”. Retrieved from

Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS quarterly, 19(2), 189-211.

Compeau, D., Higgins, C. A., & Huff, S. (1999). Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: A longitudinal study. MIS quarterly, 22(2), 145-158.

Consiglio Europeo (2014). Council conclusions of 20 May 2014 on effective teacher education. Retrieved from

Consiglio Europeo (2017a). Council Conclusions on school development and excellent teaching. Retrieved from

Consiglio Europeo (2017b). Conclusioni del Consiglio Europeo del 19 ottobre 2017. Retrieved from

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.

Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological methods, 1(1), 16-29.

Davis F.D., Bagozzi R.P., & Warshaw, P.R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A comparison of two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1002.

Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results. (PhD thesis). Cambridge, MA, USA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Retrieved from

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 13(3) 319-340.

Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration?. Educational technology research and development, 53(4), 25-39.

Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272-299.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA, USA: Addison-Wesley.

Flórez, F. B., Casallas, R., Hernández, M., Reyes, A., Restrepo, S., & Danies, G. (2017). Changing a generation's way of thinking: Teaching computational thinking through programming. Review of Educational Research, 87(4), 834-860.

Fraillon, J., Ainley, J., Schulz, W., Friedman, T., & Gebhardt, E. (2014). Preparing for life in a digital age - the IEA international computer and information literacy study international report. Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht, London: Springer International Publishing.

George, A., & Sanders, M. (2017). Evaluating the potential of teacher-designed technology-based tasks for meaningful learning: Identifying needs for professional development. Education and Information Technologies, 22(6), 2871-2895.

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston, MA, USA: Allyn & Bacon.

Gilbert, A. D. (2015). An exploration of the use of and the attitudes toward technology in first-year instrumental music. (PhD thesis). Lincoln, NE, USA: University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Retrieved from

Guttman, L. (1954). Some necessary conditions for common-factor analysis. Psychometrika, 19(2), 149-161.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Hogarty, K. Y., Hines, C. V., Kromrey, J. D., Ferron, J. M., & Mumford, K. R. (2005). The quality of factor solutions in exploratory factor analysis: The influence of sample size, communality, and overdetermination. Educational and psychological measurement, 65(2), 202-226.

Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179-185.

Hsiao, C. H., & Yang, C. (2011). The intellectual development of the technology acceptance model: A co- citation analysis. International Journal of Information Management, 31(2), 128-136.

Ingoglia, S. (2013). L’analisi fattoriale confermativa e le sue applicazioni ai problemi della misurazione. In C. Barbaranelli & S. Ingoglia (Eds.), I modelli di equazioni strutturali: Temi e prospettive (pp. 59-110). Milano, IT: LED.

Jennrich, R. I., & Sampson, P. F. (1966). Rotation for simple loadings. Psychometrika, 31(3), 313-323.

Jöreskog, K. G., & van Thillo, M. (1972). LISREL: A general computer program for estimating a linear structural equation system involving multiple indicators of unmeasured variables. Princeton, NJ, USA: Educational Testing Service.

Kaiser, H. F. (1970). A second generation Little Jiffy. Psychometrika, 35(4), 401-416.

Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36.

King, W. R., & He, J. (2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43(6), 740-755.

Kunce, J. T., Cook, W. D., & Miller, D. E. (1975). Random variables and correlational overkill. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 35(3), 529-534.

MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Preacher, K. J., & Hong, S. (2001). Sample size in factor analysis: The role of model error. Multivariate behavioral research, 36(4), 611-637.

MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological methods, 4(1), 84-99.

Maggino, F., & Mola, T. (2007). Il differenziale semantico per la misura degli atteggiamenti: costruzione, applicazione e analisi. Presentazione di uno studio. Firenze, IT: Firenze University Press.

Marangunić, N., & Granić, A. (2015). Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Universal access in the information society, 14(1), 81-95.

Marascuilo, L. A., & Levin, J. R. (1983). Multivariate Statistics in the Social Sciences. Monterey, CA, USA: Brooks/Cole.

Marsh, H. W., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Lüdtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Morin, A. J., & Trautwein, U. (2009). Exploratory structural equation modeling, integrating CFA and EFA: Application to students' evaluations of university teaching. Structural equation modeling: A multidisciplinary journal, 16(3), 439-476.

McDonald, R. P. (1985). Factor analysis and related methods. Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Moore, G. C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information systems research, 2(3), 192-222.

Nair, I., & Das, V. M. (2011). Analysis of recent studies undertaken for assessing acceptance of technology among teachers using TAM. International Journal of Computer Applications, 32(8), 38-46.

Nistor, N., & Heymann, J. O. (2010). Reconsidering the role of attitude in the TAM: An answer to Teo (2009a). British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), E142-E145.

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY, USA: McGraw Hill.

OCSE (2015). Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. Paris, FR: OECD Publishing.

OCSE (2019). TALIS 2018 Results (Vol. 1): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners. Paris, FR: OECD Publishing.

Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana, IL, USA: University of Illinois press.

Parlamento Europeo e Consiglio (2006). Raccomandazione del Parlamento Europeo e del Consiglio del 18 dicembre 2006 relativa a competenze chiave per l'apprendimento permanente. Retrieved from

Punie, Y., & Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Luxembourg, LU: Publications Office of the European Union.

Schepers, J., & Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & management, 44(1), 90-103.

Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Teo, T. (2015). Becoming more specific: Measuring and modeling teachers’ perceived usefulness of ICT in the context of teaching and learning. Computers & Education, 88, 202-214.

Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13-35.

Scherer, R., Tondeur, J., Siddiq, F., & Baran, E. (2018). The importance of attitudes toward technology for pre-service teachers' technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge: Comparing structural equation modeling approaches. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 67-80.

Shiue, Y. M. (2007). Investigating the sources of teachers' instructional technology use through the decomposed theory of planned behavior. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(4), 425-453.

Straub, E. T. (2009). Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 625-649.

Taherdoost, H. (2018). A review of technology acceptance and adoption models and theories. Procedia Manufacturing, 22, 960-967.

Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995a). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information systems research, 6(2), 144-176.

Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995b). Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. MIS quarterly, 19(4), 561-570.

Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52(2), 302-312.

Teo, T., Ursavaş, Ö. F., & Bahçekapili, E. (2011). Efficiency of the technology acceptance model to explain pre‐service teachers' intention to use technology: A Turkish study. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 28(2), 93-101.

Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., & Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: Toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS quarterly, 15(1), 125-143.

Thurstone, L. L. (1947). Multiple factor analysis. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press.

van Braak, J. (2001). Individual characteristics influencing teachers' class use of computers. Journal of educational computing research, 25(2), 141-157.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.

Voogt, J., Shin, T., Mishra, P., Koehler, M., Schmidt, D., Baran, E., et al. (2011). Teachers’ assessment of TPACK: Where are we and what is needed?. In M. Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 4422-4426). Chesapeake, VA, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Zhang, P., Aikman, S. N., & Sun, H. (2008). Two types of attitudes in ICT acceptance and use. Intl. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24(7), 628-648.



How to Cite

Foschi, L. C. (2022). Construction, factor structure and reliability of an instrument to investigate teachers’ perceptions and attitudes towards the use of digital technologies in teaching. ITALIAN JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, (29), 062–075.