Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This instrument development and validation study examined urban K-12 teachers’ self-efficacy in performing technology integration tasks, framed through the lens of Bandura’s (1997) concept of self-efficacy, which is the belief in one’s capability to execute specific actions. The Technology Integration Confidence Scale (TIC-S) version 3 was developed and refined through a pretest, pilot study, and final quantitative investigation to evaluate its psychometric properties. Following pretesting, the instrument’s subscale structure was realigned based on both theoretical foundations and statistical insights. Grounded in the 2017 ISTE Standards for Educators and adapted from Browne’s (2007) TIC-S version 2, the revised survey was administered online to 327 urban Catholic school teachers in Southern California. Participants self-reported their confidence in performing key technology-integrated pedagogical tasks. Statistical procedures, including Cronbach’s alpha and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using principal component analysis (PCA) with oblique rotation, confirmed the instrument’s reliability and validity. The TIC-S version 3 is both a psychometrically sound research instrument and a practical diagnostic tool for assessing teachers’ readiness to integrate technology into instruction. For practice, results highlight its utility in guiding targeted professional development and supporting teachers in adapting to emerging technologies, including AI-enhanced learning environments. For research, the study supports further validation across diverse contexts, and recommends longitudinal and mixed-methods investigations to examine changes in teacher self-efficacy and its relationship to classroom practice. Overall, TIC-S version 3 provides a meaningful framework for advancing effective technology integration in K–12 education and is affirmed as a tool for future research related to techno-pedagogical applications in education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gomez et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: