A multidimensional measure of pre-service teachers' perceived technological competence for teaching: integrating TPACK, DigCompEdu, and self-efficacy.

BACKGROUND

Technological competence for teaching is multidimensional, encompassing digital tool use, professional digital practice, assessment, pedagogical integration, adaptability, and technology-related self-efficacy. Existing measures often assess these components separately rather than within a unified instrument.

OBJECTIVE

This study developed and validated a multidimensional self-report scale of pre-service teachers' technological competence for teaching by integrating complementary elements of the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, the European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators (DigCompEdu), and technology-related self-efficacy.

METHODS

A multi-phase scale-development and validation design involved two independent cohorts of pre-service teachers at a public university in Türkiye. The pilot sample (n = 513) was used for item reduction and exploratory factor analysis (EFA), while the main sample (n = 974) was used for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), reliability and construct-validity analyses, gender measurement-invariance testing, and concurrent associations with a scenario-based technological-pedagogical judgment measure. An initial 90-item pool was reduced to 48 after content review and to 33 following iterative EFA. Principal axis factoring with Promax rotation and diagonally weighted least squares CFA were used.

RESULTS

EFA supported a six-factor, 33-item structure: Foundational Digital Tool Use; Professional Digital Communication and Collaboration; Assessment, Feedback, and Learning Analytics; Pedagogically Aligned Technology Integration; Instructional Technology Troubleshooting and Adaptability; and Teaching-Related Technology Self-Efficacy. The factors explained 62.8% of the variance. CFA showed excellent fit, χ 2(480) = 807.32, CFI = 0.980, TLI = 0.978, RMSEA = 0.026, SRMR = 0.036. AVE ranged from 0.520 to 0.613, HTMT from 0.024 to 0.310, and subscale reliability from ω = 0.804 to 0.895. Configural, loading, and threshold invariance were supported across gender. All dimensions correlated positively with scenario-based judgment (rs = 0.218-0.317, ps < 0.001), jointly explaining 35.4% of quiz-score variance.

CONCLUSION

Findings provide initial psychometric support for a six-dimensional self-report measure of technological competence for teaching. The instrument is best interpreted at the subscale level, and its scores represent self-reported technological competence rather than direct observation of teaching performance. It is appropriate for research, formative use, and program evaluation. Further validation across institutions, longitudinal designs, and independent performance-based measures is recommended.