Digital Leadership Among Heads of Departments at The Institute of Teacher Education Malaysia: Kepimpinan Digital dalam Kalangan Ketua Jabatan di Institut Pendidikan Guru Malaysia

Fauziah Ismail; Zaitun Ghazali

doi:10.37134/mrj.vol14.2.10.2025

Authors

Fauziah Ismail Jabatan Perancangan, Penyelidikan dan Inovasi, IPG Kampus Pendidikan Teknik, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia
Zaitun Ghazali Jabatan Perancangan, Penyelidikan dan Inovasi, IPG Kampus Pendidikan Teknik, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37134/mrj.vol14.2.10.2025

Keywords:

Digital Leadership, Heads of Departments, Institut Pendidikan Guru, Descriptive Study

Abstract

The growing integration of digital technologies into educational paradigms requires a shift in leadership approaches, especially in digital leadership. This descriptive survey was conducted to assess the state of digital leadership among Heads of Departments (HoDs) at an Institut Pendidikan Guru (IPG) campus in Malaysia. Answering the data in a structured questionnaire across all 14 Head of Departments showed a high level of agreement on why digital leadership is significant, with predominantly positive views (M=4.81). Despite the above, the belief-practice gap can be recognised: strong beliefs were not realised well in practice due to substantial systemic hurdles (M=4.24). The chief challenges mentioned were a shortage of time to prepare for digital upskilling (M=4.00), a lack of technological infrastructure (M=3.57), and staff reluctance to change (M=3.57). The Heads of Departments prioritised strategic interventions for improvement, specifically increased funding for digital technology (M=4.64), the creation of a clear institutional digital policy (M=4.43), and repeated hands-on training (M=4.36). The results of this study are significant to IPG and the Ministry of Education, as they provide research-driven insights to support the development of focused professional development, targeted policy initiatives, and the rational allocation of resources. Through this research, we emphasise that while middle-line leaders possess capabilities, they also face institutional challenges related to time, infrastructure and support.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2023). Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interactive learning environments, 31(2), 863-875.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180

Almazova, N., Krylova, E., Rubtsova, A., & Odinokaya, M. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for Russian higher education amid COVID-19: Teachers’ perspective. Education Sciences, 10(12), 368. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10120368

Bennett, J. (2018). The role of middle leaders in leading and managing change in schools: A study of primary schools in England. School Leadership & Management, 38(3), 315– 334. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2017.1411902

DeCoito, I., & Estaiteyeh, M. (2022). Transitioning to online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: An exploration of STEM teachers’ views, successes, and challenges. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(3), 340-356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-09958-z

El-Masri, M., & Tarhini, A. (2017). Factors affecting the adoption of e-learning systems in Qatar and USA: Extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology 2 (UTAUT2). Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 743-763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9508-8

Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551

Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5

Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2016). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education). Putrajaya: Ministry of Education Malaysia.

Pettersson, F. (2021). Understanding digitalization and educational change in school by means of activity theory and the levels of learning concept. Education and Information Technologies, 26(1), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10239-8

Prestridge, S. (2019). Categorising teachers’ use of social media for their professional learning: A self-generating professional learning paradigm. Computers & education, 129, 143-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.11.003

Sheninger, E. (2019). Digital leadership: Changing paradigms for changing times (2nd ed.). Corwin Press.

Tourón, J., Martín, D., Navarro, E., Pradas, S., & Íñigo, V. (2018). Validación de constructo de un instrumento para medir la competencia digital docente de los profesores (CDD) [Construct validation of a tool to measure the teachers’ digital competence (TDC)]. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 76(269), 25–54. https://doi.org/10.22550/REP76-1-2018-02

UNESCO, P. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. Paris, France: Educational and Cultural Organization of the United Nations.

Van der Spoel, I., Noroozi, O., Schuurink, E., & Van Ginkel, S. (2020). Teachers’ online teaching expectations and experiences during the Covid19-pandemic in the Netherlands. European journal of teacher education, 43(4), 623-638.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1821185