Digital Competence and Self-Efficacy of TVET Instructors: An Empirical Study at University Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah (UMPSA)

The increasing integration of digital technologies in Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) has placed growing demands on instructors to demonstrate not only technical proficiency but also the pedagogical capacity to effectively embed digital tools in skills-based learning environments. Despite this, empirical research examining the determinants of digital competence among TVET instructors particularly the role of digital self-efficacy remains limited in the Malaysian higher education context. This study addresses this gap by investigating the levels of digital competence and digital self-efficacy among TVET instructors at a single institution, Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah (UMPSA), and by examining the relationship between these two constructs. Guided by the European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators (DigCompEdu) and grounded in Bandura’s self-efficacy theory, the study employed a quantitative survey design. Data were collected via self-reported online questionnaires from a sample of 202 TVET instructors (out of a population of 423) obtained through total population sampling, achieving a 47.8% response rate. The findings reveal that instructors perceive a high level of digital competence across the DigCompEdu domains, with no notable variation attributed to teaching experience. A positive relationship was identified between digital self-efficacy and digital competence, suggesting that instructors’ confidence in their digital capabilities is a contributing factor to their overall competence. However, as self-efficacy alone does not fully account for competence outcomes, other institutional and contextual factors including access to technology, quality of professional development, and pedagogical support are likely to play equally significant roles. While the single-institution focus may limit broader generalizability, these findings carry important implications for institutional policy and structured professional development, underscoring the need for multi-faceted strategies to sustain and enhance digital competence among TVET instructors in Malaysia.

Digital competence, TVET Instructors, DigCompEdu

1. Abd Hakim, J., & Singh, D. (2024). Teori kompetensi: Ulasan dari perspektif kemahiran digital. Malaysian Journal of Information and Communication Technology (MyJICT), 5(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.53840/myjict5-1-28 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Aziz, A., Omar, M. K., Rashid, A. M., & Abdullah, A. (2022). The secondary school students’ interest toward the TVET programs: Demographic differences. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(4), 80–96. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bandura, A. (2021). Toward a psychology of human agency: Pathways and reflections. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(4), 666–679. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Boonpu, P., & Chaisuk, S. (2022). Technical vocational education and training (TVET) model in the disruptive technology era. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 21(2), 1–14. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Diao, J., & Qu, Y. (2024). Teaching competence of TVET teachers in the digital age: Implementation and evaluation of a training program in China. Evaluation and Program Planning, 103, Article 102402. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Evans, J. R., & Mathur, A. (2018). The value of online surveys. Internet Research, 28(4), 854–887. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-03-2018-0089 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. International Labour Organization. (2020). Skills for a resilient youth. ILO. https://www.ilo.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Mohammad Aniq bin Amdan, Janilus, N., Jasman, M. N. bin, & Kasdiah, M. A. H. bin. (2024). Advancement of AI tools in learning for technical vocational education and training (TVET) in Malaysia: Empowering students and tutors. International Journal of Scientific Research and Archives, 12(1), 2061–2068. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Muzaffar, M. S., Mohd Farid, A., & Noor Intan, T. (2020). Kesediaan pengetahuan Revolusi Industri 4.0 dalam kalangan pensyarah Politeknik Kota. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343470488 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Nurlaila, L., Bastian, A., & Rahmat, A. (2022). Kompetensi digital guru SMP negeri di Kecamatan Ujung Batu Kabupaten Rokan Hulu pada masa pandemi COVID-19. Fair Value: Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 5(1), 323–332. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Redecker, C. (2017). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research methods for business students (8th ed.). Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Schwab, K. (2018). The fourth industrial revolution. Crown Business. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. UNESCO. (2018). ICT competency framework for teachers (Version 3). UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• After Rekhta: A Narrative Study of Urdu Fan Fiction on Wattpad and TikTok Public Aesthetics, Digital Economy, and New Modes of Reading.