ArticleEducation and information technologies2025
Quality of technology integration matters: Positive associations with students' behavioral engagement and digital competencies for learning.
Article in Education and information technologies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The relationship between digital literacy and mental health resilience among college students-based on the mediating role of digital learning.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Students' acceptance of digital media in physical education-a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- How to promote student creativity through AI in higher education: the role of students' attitude and digital competencies.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- An educational initiative aimed at increasing antimicrobial resistance awareness among school-going Jordanian youth.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite extensive research on technology's potential to enhance teaching, large-scale studies often report mixed or negative impacts of technology use at school on student learning achievements. This ambiguity is often attributed to previous large-scale studies focusing more on the frequency rather than the quality of technology integration in the classroom. To further investigate this issue, our study developed the Technology Integration Quality Scale (TIQS) to measure students' perceptions of technology integration across different dimensions of teaching quality: support for learning, classroom management, individualized teaching, and cognitive activation. Using a sample of 2,281 students from 29 upper secondary schools in Switzerland, we validated the TIQS through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. We also employed cluster-robust structural equation modelling to examine how both the frequency and perceived quality of technology integration predict students' self-assessed digital competencies and behavioral engagement for learning. The results show that quality explains considerably more variance than the frequency of technology integration in promoting both students' behavioral engagement and digital competencies for learning. However, for digital competencies, quantity also explains a substantial amount of variance. By simultaneously considering multiple dimensions of teaching quality, the frequency of technology use and two output variables, this study contributes to the existing research by offering a more nuanced perspective on the impact of technology integration. Furthermore, interaction effects between the independent variables highlight the need to further explore the relationships between different dimensions of teaching quality, which could also contribute to the development of the theory of generic teaching quality
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.