What Drives Coding Adoption in Mathematics Teacher Education? Insights from an Extended UTAUT Model
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.5143Keywords:
Coding in education, Technology acceptance , Pre-service mathematics teachers , UTAUT, Hedonic motivationAbstract
This study investigates the factors influencing pre-service mathematics teachers’ intentions to integrate coding into their instructional practices, using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) as its theoretical foundation. While coding is widely recognized as a crucial digital competency, its effective integration into mathematics education depends on various motivational and contextual variables. The study was conducted with 334 pre-service mathematics teachers from seven universities in Turkey. Data were collected using the Coding Usage Intention Scale, developed based on the UTAUT model and extended with additional variables: self-efficacy, perceived learning opportunities, and hedonic motivation. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was employed to test the proposed model. The results revealed that hedonic motivation was the most significant predictor of coding intention (β = 0.646, p < .001). Other significant predictors included performance expectancy, social influence, self-efficacy, and perceived learning opportunities. In contrast, effort expectancy and facilitating conditions did not have statistically significant effects. The overall model demonstrated good fit indices, supporting the validity of the proposed framework. These findings highlight the importance of both cognitive and affective factors in shaping pre-service teachers’ willingness to adopt coding in education. The study offers theoretical and practical implications for teacher education programs, suggesting that increasing enjoyment, competence, and pedagogical awareness around coding may enhance its adoption in mathematics instruction.
References
Alenezi, A.R., Malek, A., Karim, A. & Veloo, A. (2010). An empirical investigation into the role of enjoyment, computer anxiety, computer self-efficacy and internet experience in influencing the students’ intention to use e-learning: A case study. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(4), 22–34.
Aliaño, Á. M., Hueros, A. M. D., Franco, M. D. G., & Aguaded, I. (2019). Mobile learning in university contexts based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 8(1), 7–17. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2019.1.317
Alshammari, S. H. (2021). Determining the factors that affect the use of virtual classrooms: A modification of the UTAUT model. Journal of Information Technology Education. Research, 20, 117. https://doi.org/10.28945/4709
Bagozzi, R.P. (2007). The legacy of the technology acceptance model and a proposal for a paradigm shift. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8 (4), 243‐54.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248–287.
Benight, C. & Bandura, A. (2004). Social cognitive theory of posttraumatic recovery: The role of perceived self-efficacy. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 1129-1148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2003.08.008
Bers, M. U., González-González, C., & Armas-Torres, M. B. (2019). Coding as a playground: Promoting positive learning experiences in childhood classrooms. Computers & Education, 138, 130-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.013
Brown, S. A., Dennis, A. R., & Venkatesh, V. (2010). Predicting collaboration technology use: Integrating technology adoption and collaboration research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 27(2), 9–54.
Byrne, B. M. (2012). Structural equation modeling with Mplus. Routledge.
Calao, L. A., Moreno-Le´on, J., Correa, H. E., & Robles, G. (2015). Developing Mathematical Thinking with Scratch. Design for Teaching and Learning in a Networked World (pp. 17-27). Springer International Publishing
Cheng, H. (April 16, 2016). Programming Can Help Narrow Achievement Gap.
Chen, G., Shen, J., Barth-Cohen, L., Jiang, S., Huang, X., & Eltoukhy, M. (2017). Assessing elementary students’ computational thinking in everyday reasoning and robotics programming. Computers & education, 109, 162-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.001
Chao, C. M. (2019). Factors determining the behavioral intention to use mobile learning: An application and extension of the UTAUT model. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 1652. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01652
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10(1), 7.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
Dawson, V. (2008). Use of information communication technology by early career science teachers in Western Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 30(2), 203-219.
Drent, M. and Meelissen, M. (2008) Which factors obstruct or stimulate teacher educators to use ICT innovatively? Computers & Education, 51, 187-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.05.001
Fessakis, G., Gouli, E. ve Mavroudi, E. (2013). Problem solving by 5–6 years old kindergarten children in a computer programming environment: A case study. Computers & Education, 63, 87-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.016
Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (5th ed.). Sage.
Fluck, A., Webb, M., Cox, M., Angeli, C., Malyn-Smith, J., Voogt, J., & Zagami, J. (2016). Arguing for computer science in the school curriculum. Educational Technology and Society, 19(3), 38–46.
Gadanidis, G. (2015). Coding as a Trojan Horse for mathematics education reform. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 34(2), 155-173.
Gim, N. G. (2021). Development of life skills program for primary school students: Focus on entry programming. Computers, 10(5), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers10050056
Granić, A. (2023). Technology Acceptance and Adoption in Education. In: Zawacki-Richter, O., Jung, I. (eds) Handbook of Open, Distance and Digital Education (p.183-197). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2080-6_11
Gunasinghe, A., Abd-Hamid, J., Khatibi, A., & Azam, S. F. (2019). Academicians' acceptance of online learning environments: A review of information system theories and models. Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 39, 31–39. https://doi.org/10.34257/GJCSTHVOL19IS1PG31.
Hair, J. F., Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L. and Black W. C. (2010),"Multivariate Data Analysis", 7th Edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hatlevik, O. E. (2017). Examining the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy, their digital competence, strategies to evaluate information, and use of ICT at school. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61(5), 555-567. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2016.1172501
Harryanto, Muchran, M. & Ahmar, A.,S. (2018). Application of TAM model to the use of information technology. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7, 37-40.
Hermita, N., Wijaya, T.T., Yusron, E., Abidin, Y., Alim, J.A. and Putra, Z.H. (2023) Extending unified theory of acceptance and use of technology to understand the acceptance of digital textbook for elementary School in Indonesia. Frontiers in Education.8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.958800
Hong, W., Chan, F. K. Y., Thong, J. Y. L., Chasalow, L., & Dhillon, G. (2014). A framework and guidelines for context-specific theorizing in information systems research. Information Systems Research, 25(1), 111–136.
Hoyle, R. H. (Ed.). (2012). Handbook of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
Hu, S., Laxman, K., & Lee, K. (2020). Exploring factors affecting academics’ adoption of emerging mobile technologies-an extended UTAUT perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 4615-4635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10171-x
Kalelioglu, F., Gulbahar, Y., & Kukul, V. (2016). A framework for computational thinking based on a systematic research review. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing, 4(3), 583-596.
Kamau, J. W. (2017). Adoption of free desktop open source software in developing countries in Africa: a case of Kenyan University students (Doctoral dissertation).
Kay, R. H. (2006). Evaluating strategies used to incorporate technology into preservice education: A review of the literature. Journal of research on technology in education, 38(4), 383-408.
Kirschner, P., & Selinger, M. (2003). The state of affairs of teacher education with respect to information and communications technology. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 12(1), 5-17.
Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
Kundu, A., Bej, T., & Dey, K. N. (2021). Investigating effects of self-efficacy and infrastructure on teachers' ICT use, an extension of UTAUT. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), 16(6), 1-21. http://doi.org/10.4018/IJWLTT.20211101.oa10
Kruse, S. D., Rakha, S., & Calderone, S. (2018). Developing cultural competency in higher education: An agenda for practice. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(6), 733-750.
Lee, J. (2020). Coding in early childhood. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 21(3), 266–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463949119846541
Lee, V., & Lin, S.-J. (2008). Podcasting acceptance on campus: An extension of the UTAUT model. In DIGIT 2008 Proceedings (pp. 2–15). Twenty Ninth International Conference on Information Systems. Paris, France.
Levitt, L. (2001). An analysis of elementary teachers’ beliefs regarding the teaching and learning of science. Science Education, 86, 1–22.
Liu, I.-F., Chen, M. C., Sun, Y. S., Wible, D., & Kuo, C.-H. (2010). Extending the TAM model to explore the factors that affect intention to use an online learning community. Computers & Education, 54(2), 600–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.009
Lumpe, A., Haney, J., & Czerniak, C. (2000). Assessing teachers’ beliefs about their science teaching context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 275–292.
Madani, H., Adhikari, A. and Hodgdon, C. (2023). Understanding faculty acceptance of online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Saudi Arabian case study. Journal of International Education in Business, 16(2), 152-166. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIEB-12-2021-0109
Marsh, J., Plowman, L., Yamada-Rice, D., Bishop, J., & Scott, F. (2016). Digital play: A new classification. Early Years, 36(3), 242-253. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2016.1167675
Mason, S. (2017). The coding versus language debate. MLTAQ Journal, 166, 23-28.
Mclennan, D. P. (2017). Creating coding stories and games. Journal of Teaching, 10(3), 18-21
Metin, S., Basaran, M., & Kalyenci, D. (2023). Examining coding skills of five-year-old children. Pedagogical Research, 8(2), em0154. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/12802
Or, C. (2022). Students’ and Teachers’ Acceptance of Online Assessment in Higher Education: Recommendations for Further Research. In D. Georgieva, N. Tas, & P. Goranov (Eds.), Determinants of Online Assessment Adoption in Singapore Technical College (pp. 58–78). ISTES Organization
Papavlasopoulou, S., Sharma, K., & Giannakos, M. N. (2018). How do you feel about learning to code? Investigating the effect of children’s attitudes towards coding using eye-tracking. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 17, 50-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.01.004
Raffaghelli, E., Rodríguez,M. and Guerrero-Rold´an, A.(2022). Applying the UTAUT model to explain the students’ acceptance of an early warning system in Higher Education. Computers & Education, 182, 104468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104468
Rich, P. J., Browning, S. F., Perkins, M., Shoop, T., Yoshikawa, E., & Belikov, O. M. (2019). Coding in K-8: International trends in teaching elementary/primary computing. TechTrends, 63, 311-329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0295-4
Rogers, M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
Romero, M., Lepage, A., & Lille, B. (2017). Computational thinking development through creative programming in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0080-z
Saber Chtourou, M., & Souiden, N. (2010). Rethinking the TAM model: time to consider fun. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27(4), 336-344. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761011052378
Samaradiwakara, G. D. M. N., & Gunawardena, C. G. (2014). Comparison of existing technology acceptance theories and models to suggest a well improved theory/model. International technical sciences journal, 1(1), 21-36.
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling. In Handbook of market research (pp. 587-632). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Solin, P. (2017). Bringing More STEAM to Mathematics Education. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 24(4), 191-198.
Solin, P., & Roanes-Lozano, E. (2020). Using computer programming as an effective complement to mathematics education: experimenting with the standards for mathematics practice in a multidisciplinary environment for teaching and learning with technology in the 21st century. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 27(3), 147-156.
Staples, A., Pugach, M. C., & Himes, D. J. (2005). Rethinking the technology integration challenge: Cases from three urban elementary schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37(3), 285–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2005.10782438
Sulistyaningtyas, R. E., Yuliantoro, P., Astiyani, D., & Nugraheni, C. (2020). A literature review of coding for early childhood. In Proceedings of the 2nd Borobudur International Symposium on Humanities and Social Sciences, BIS-HSS. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.18- 11-2020.2311709
Tan, P. J. B. (2013). Applying the UTAUT to Understand Factors Affecting the Use of English E-Learning Websites in Taiwan. SAGE Open, 3(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013503837
Tang D. and Chen L. (2011)."A review of the evolution of research on information Technology Acceptance Model," 2011 International Conference on Business Management and Electronic Information, 588-591. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICBMEI.2011.5917980
Teo, T. (2011). Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: Model development and test. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2432-2440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.008
Tewari, A., Singh, R., Mathur,S.& Pande,S.(2023). A modified UTAUT framework to predict students’ intention to adopt online learning: moderating role of openness to change. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 40(2), 30-147. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-04-2022-0093
Tondeur, J., Van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers&Education, 59(1),134-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.009
Venkatesh, V. (2022). Adoption and use of AI tools: a research agenda grounded in UTAUT. Annals of operations research, 308(1), 641-652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03918-9
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. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., Xu, X., (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157-178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
Yadav, A., Gretter, S., Hambrusch, S., & Sands, P. (2016). Expanding computer science education in schools: understanding teacher experiences and challenges. Computer science education, 26(4), 235-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2016.1257418
Wang, H.-Y., Huang, I., & Hwang, G.-J. (2014). Effects of an integrated Scratch and project-based learning approach on the learning achievements of gifted students in computer courses. 2014 IIAI 3rd International Conference on Advanced Applied Informatics (pp. 382–387). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IIAI-AAI.2014.85
Wedlock, B. C., & Trahan, M. P. (2019). Revisiting the Unified Theory of Acceptance and the Use of Technology (UTAUT) Model and Scale: An Empirical Evolution of Educational Technology. Research Issues in Contemporary Education, 4(1), 6-20.
Welch, L. E., Shumway, J. F., Clarke-Midura, J., & Lee, V. R. (2022). Exploring measurement through coding: Children’s conceptions of a dynamic linear unit with robot coding toys. Education Sciences, 12(2), 143.
Wepner, S. B., Ziomek, N., & Tao, L. (2003). Three teacher educators' perspectives about the shifting responsibilities of infusing technology into the curriculum. Action in Teacher Education, 24(4), 53-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2003.10463279
Williams, M. D., Rana, N. P., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2015). The unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): a literature review. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(3), 443-488. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-09-2014-0088
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Articles may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Authors alone are responsible for the contents of their articles. The journal owns the copyright of the articles. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of the research material.
The author(s) of a manuscript agree that if the manuscript is accepted for publication in the journal, the published article will be copyrighted using a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license. This license allows others to freely copy, distribute, and display the copyrighted work, and derivative works based upon it, under certain specified conditions.
Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright in their articles, or to adapt any such images or artwork for inclusion in their articles. The copyright holder must be made explicitly aware that the image(s) or artwork will be made freely available online as part of the article under a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
