Perceived Pedagogical Value of Digital Technologies Among Engineering Students

Ivana Lončarević; Selena Samardžić Cvijanović; Robert Lakatoš

doi:10.23947/2334-8496-2026-14-2-159-175

Authors

Ivana Lončarević Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Serbia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8858-4455
Selena Samardžić Cvijanović Faculty of technical sciences https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2578-7412
Robert Lakatoš Faculty of Technical Sciences, University of Novi Sad, Serbia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8206-7692

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2026-14-2-159-175

Keywords:

Digital Technologies, Pedagogical Value, Engineering Students, Student Engagement

Abstract

The increasing integration of digital technologies in higher education raises important questions about their real pedagogical value in teaching practice. The aim of this research was to examine students’ attitudes about the use of digital technologies, their representation in teaching, and their influence on the perceived pedagogical value of teaching at the technical faculty, examined through correlational and regression analyses. The research also included an analysis of the relationships among digital technologies, student engagement, and students’ assessments of teachers’ digital competence, particularly under conditions of limited technical resources. The research was conducted on a sample of 375 students in engineering study programs. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire and analysed using exploratory factor analysis, reliability analysis of the measurement scales (Cronbach’s alpha and, for the two-item scale, the Spearman-Brown coefficient), correlation analysis and regression models. The results show that, although students generally have a positive perception of digital technologies and teachers’ digital competence, exposure to advanced digital tools in teaching remains limited. Student engagement showed as the most significant predictor of the perceived pedagogical value of digital technologies, along with the institutional support and students’ digital competencies, which also made significant contributions. In contrast, teachers’ digital competence and level of exposure to digital technologies were not significant predictors when considered alongside other variables. These results demonstrate that the perceived pedagogical value of digital technologies primarily depends on the ability to encourage students’ interaction and active participation in the teaching process. The research also provides empirical evidence from the technical faculty context and contributes to understanding the conditions under which digital technologies enhance teaching quality.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

👁 Abstract Views: 1📥 PDF Downloads: 0

References

Abdurashidova, M, Balbaa, ME, Nematov, S, Mukhiddinov, Z & Nasriddinov, I. (2023). The impact of innovation and digitalization on the quality of higher education: A study of selected universities in Uzbekistan. Journal of Intelligent Systems, 32, 20230070. https://doi.org/10.1515/jisys-2023-0070

Alenezi, M. (2021). Deep dive into digital transformation in higher education institutions. Education Sciences, 11, 770. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11120770

Almaiah, MA, Alfaisal, R, Salloum, SA, Al-Otaibi, S, Al Sawafi, OS, Al-Maroof, RS, Lutfi, A, Alrawad, M, Al Mulhem, A, & Awad, AB. (2022). Determinants influencing the continuous intention to use digital technologies in higher education. Electronics, 11, 2827. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11182827

Alreiahi, NJ, Patil, P, & Alruqobah, E. (2024). Engineering students’ perceptions of e-learning in higher education: A two-university comparison. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(12), em2550. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15706

ASTI Research & Surveys. (2024). Digital Technology and its Impact on Teachers’ Working Lives. https://www.asti.ie/document-library/red-c-asti-survey-2024-digital-technology-and-its-impact-on/

Baddar, A, & Khan, M. (2023). Teachers’ intention to use digital resources in classroom teaching: The role of teacher competence, peer influence, and perceived image. Higher Learning Research Communications, 13(2), 26–41. https://doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v13i2.1397

Bond, M, Marín, VI, Dolch, C, Bedenlier, S, & Zawacki-Richter, O. (2018). Digital transformation in German higher education: Student and teacher perceptions and usage of digital media. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0130-1

Bond, M, & Bedenlier, S. (2019). Facilitating Student Engagement Through Educational Technology: Towards a Conceptual Framework. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1 (11), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.528

Bond, M, Buntins, K, Bedenlier, S, Zawacki-Richter, O, & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8

Bowden, JLH, Tickle L, & Naumann, K. (2021). The four pillars of tertiary student engagement and success: a holistic measurement approach. Studies in Higher Education, 46 (6), 1207-1224. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1672647

Broo, DG, Kaynak, O, & Sait, SM. (2022). Rethinking engineering education at the age of Industry 5.0. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 25, 100311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2021.100311

Campos, DG, & Scherer, R. (2024). Digital gender gaps in students’ knowledge, attitudes and skills: an integrative data analysis across 32 Countries. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 655–693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12272-9

Chiu, T. (2021). Digital support for student engagement in blended learning based on self-determination theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 124,106909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106909

Davis, FD. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Eisinga, R, Grotenhuis, M, & Pelzer, B. (2013). The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or Spearman-Brown? International Journal of Public Health, 58(4), 637–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-012-0416-3

Fabrigar, LR, Wegener, DT, MacCallum, RC, & Strahan, EJ. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272

Fuentes, RP, & LaBad, RB. (2025). Impact of Digital Learning Tools on Student Engagement and Academic Achievement in Higher Education: A Systematic Review. Ennoia Advances in Social Science, Technology and Education, 01(02). 53-73. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16430142

Hair, JF, Black, WC, Babin, BJ, Anderson, RE. (2018). Multivariate Data Analysis, (8th ed.). Annabel Ainscow. ISBN: 978-1-4737-5654-0

Henderson, M, Selwyn, N, & Aston, R. (2017). What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’ digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1567–1579. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946

Hsu, YP, Chiang, DF, & Kehinde, I. (2025). Transforming engineering education in the digital era: findings from a systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1568917. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1568917

Huong, TT, Vy, PNT, Minh, LH, & Linh, NT. (2025). Primary school teacher educators’ digital competence: perceived confidence and continuing needs for 21st-century teaching. Educational Process: International Journal, 15, e2025147. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.15.147

Kalyani, SR. (2024). Digital Transformation in Higher Education Institutions: Challenges and Opportunities. International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews, 11(2), 197-205. https://ijrar.org/papers/IJRAR24B4000.pdf

Kirkwood, A, & Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: what is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, Media and Technology, 39 (1), 6-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404

Le, B, Lawrie, GA, & Wang, JTH. (2022). Student Selfperception on Digital Literacy in STEM Blended Learning Environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology,) 31, 303–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-09956-1

MacCallum, RC, Widaman, KF, Zhang, S, & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84–99. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84

Margot, KC, and Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2

Qazi, A, Hasan, N, AbayomiAlli, O, Hardaker, G, Scherer, R, Sarker, Y, Paul, S., & Maitama, JZ. (2022). Gender differences in information and communication technology use & skills: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 4225–4258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10775-x

Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators (DigCompEdu). European Commission.

Røe Y, Wojniusz S. & Bjerke AH. (2022). The digital transformation of higher education teaching: four pedagogical prescriptions to move active learning pedagogy forward. Frontiers in Education, 6, 784701. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.784701

Sillat, L., Tammets, K, Laanpere, M. (2021) Digital Competence Assessment Methods in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review. Education Sciences, 11, 402. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080402

Sjöberg, J, Hoveskog, M, Tell, J, & Cherni, W. (2024). Unveiling university students’ perceptions on their teachers’ digital competence. Education Sciences, 14(8), 891. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080891

Tešanović, S, Kukobat, L, Šobot, N, & Hrstić, B. (2019). Korištenje digitalnih medija u obrazovnom procesu visokoškolskih ustanova u Bosni i Hercegovini. Međunarodna naučna konferencija Mediji i ekonomija, 61-68.

Tondeur, J, van Braak, J, Ertmer, PA, & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65, 555–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2

Velicer, WF, & Fava, JL. (1998). Affects of variable and subject sampling on factor pattern recovery. Psychological Methods, 3(2), 231–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.2.231

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. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Wadmany, R, & Kliachko, S. (2014). The significance of digital pedagogy: teachers’ perceptions and the factors influencing their abilities as digital pedagogues. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 11, 22-33.

West, SG, Finch, JF, & Curran PJ. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies, in R. H. Hoyle (ed.), Structural equation modelling: Concepts, issues and applications (56–75), Sage.

Zakrzewski, J., & Newton, B. (2022). Technology in teacher education: student perceptions of instructional technology in the classroom. Journal on Empowering Teaching Excellence, 6 (1), 48–59. https://doi.org/10.26077/0b43-c702

Zou, Y, Kuek, F, Feng, W & Cheng, X. (2025). Digital learning in the 21st century: trends, challenges, and innovations in technology integration. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1562391. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1562391