The (Technology) Implementation Gap Among Indonesian Teachers: Understanding the Disconnect Between Personal and Professional Technology Use
Repository URI
Repository DOI
Change log
Authors
Abstract
The transformation of education in the 21st century requires teachers to effectively integrate technology into their instructional practices. However, in many developing countries, like Indonesia, there is a significant disconnect between teachers’ personal technology proficiency and their classroom implementation. This preliminary research investigates the “technology implementation gap,” a concept referring to the measurable difference between teachers’ personal technology use and their professional tech integration. Through a mixed-method survey of 69 Indonesian secondary English teachers across Indonesia’s diverse geographical and institutional contexts, this research reveals a substantial implementation gap: while 78.3% of participating teachers use technology daily in their personal lives, only 26.1% integrate it consistently into their practice. Descriptive analysis reveals that this gap consistently persists across all participating teachers’ demographic characteristics, suggesting that systemic rather than individual factors are driving this phenomenon. Complementary qualitative analysis identifies four primary factors that teachers perceived as contributing factors to the gap: challenges in infrastructure and accessibility; barriers related to institutional policy; lack of pedagogical efficacy, and disparity in contextual resources. Additionally, professional development (PD) emerges as a critical yet insufficient intervention point, where most teachers have participated in technology-related PD but still struggle to translate their learning into practice. The concept of the implementation gap offers a lens for understanding technology integration challenges by shifting the focus from mere accessibility or individual skills focus to the complex interplay of personal competence, institutional support, and contextual challenges.

