How Heutagogy-Based E-Leadership Enables 21st-Century Learning: The Mediating Role of Teacher Competence in Indonesian Public Schools
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51454/jet.v7i3.996Keywords:
heutagogy-based e-leadership, teacher competence, 21st-century learning, digital pedagogy, school leadershipAbstract
Existing studies have largely examined e-leadership, heutagogy, teacher competence, and 21st-century learning separately, leaving the mechanism linking school leadership to classroom transformation insufficiently explained. This study examines whether teacher competence mediates the relationship between heutagogy-based e-leadership and 21st-century learning in Indonesian public senior high schools. Using a quantitative explanatory design, data were collected from 190 teachers in four public schools in West Java and analyzed using PLS-SEM with SmartPLS 4. The results show that heutagogy-based e-leadership significantly influences teacher competence (β = 0.884, p < 0.001) and 21st-century learning (β = 0.172, p = 0.028), while teacher competence strongly influences 21st-century learning (β = 0.792, p < 0.001). The indirect effect through teacher competence is also significant (β = 0.701, p < 0.001), indicating complementary partial mediation. The model explains 78.2% of the variance in teacher competence and 89.9% in 21st-century learning. Theoretically, the study extends heutagogy into an organizational leadership perspective and positions teacher competence as an organizational-to-instructional mechanism. Practically, schools should prioritize reflective digital leadership, sustained professional learning, collaborative lesson design, and evidence-based coaching to strengthen classroom transformation.
Downloads
References
Adams, P. (2022). Scotland and pedagogy: Moving from the Anglophone towards the continental? Nordic Studies in Education, 42(1), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.23865/nse.v42.3770
Alam, G. F. A., Wiyono, B. B., Burhanuddin, & Muslihati. (2024). Heutagogy based e-training: Internship teacher digital competence for an equitable global civilization. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 16(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2024.16.01.003
Avolio, B. J., Kahai, S., & Dodge, G. E. (2000). E-leadership: Implications for theory, research, and practice. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 615–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(00)00062-X
Blaschke, L. M. (2012). Heutagogy and lifelong learning: A review of heutagogical practice and self-determined learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(1), 56–71. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v13i1.1076
Bozgun, K., Ozaskin-Arslan, A. G., & Ulucinar-Sagir, S. (2023). COVID-19 and distance education: Evaluation in the context of twenty-first century skills. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 32, 417–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-022-00663-4
Buils, S., Esteve-Mon, F. M., Sánchez-Tarazaga, L., & Arroyo-Ainsa, P. (2022). Analysis of the digital perspective in the frameworks of teaching competencies in higher education in Spain. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 25(2), 133–152. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.25.2.32349
Cepa-Rodríguez, E., & Etxeberria Murgiondo, J. (2024). Digital competence among 1st and 4th year primary education undergraduate students: A comparative study of face-to-face and online teaching. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 24881–24898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12828-3
Cochrane, T. D., Narayan, V., Aiello, S., Alizadeh, M., Birt, J., Bone, E., Cowie, N., Cowling, M., Deneen, C., Goldacre, P., Sinfield, D., Stretton, T., & Worthington, T. (2022). Analysing mobile learning designs: A framework for transforming learning post-COVID. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7997
Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Guetterman, T. C. (2019). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (6th ed.). Pearson.
Fernández Luque, A. M., & Ramirez-Montoya, M. S. (2024). Health professionals’ competencies in the framework of complexity: Digital training model for Education 4.0. Revista Española de Documentación Científica, 47(2), e383. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2024.2.1470
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Gillaspy, E., & Vasilica, C. (2021). Developing the digital self-determined learner through heutagogical design. Higher Education Pedagogies, 6(1), 135–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2021.1916981
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. In Ulti-BASE In-Site (pp. 1–10).
Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2007). Heutagogy: A child of complexity theory. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 4(1), 111–118. https://doi.org/10.29173/cmplct8766
Jailani, Retnawati, H., Rafi, I., Mahmudi, A., Arliani, E., Zulnaidi, H., Hamid, H. S. A., & Prayitno, H. J. (2023). A phenomenological study of challenges that prospective mathematics teachers face in developing mathematical problems that require higher-order thinking skills. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(10), em2339. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13631
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077
Liu, Y., Hu, X., Ng, J. T. D., Ma, Z., & Lai, X. (2025). Ready or not? Investigating in-service teachers’ integration of learning analytics dashboard for assessing students’ collaborative problem solving in K–12 classrooms. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 1745–1776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12842-5
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
Morgado, S., Leite, L., & Dourado, L. (2022). Teaching for the contextualised learning of science: A checklist-based science curriculum analysis. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(4), 1072–1095. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2022.163
Nitzl, C., Roldán, J. L., & Cepeda, G. (2016). Mediation analysis in partial least squares path modeling: Helping researchers discuss more sophisticated models. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(9), 1849–1864. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-07-2015-0302
Nurhidayat, E., Mujiyanto, J., Yuliasri, I., & Hartono, R. (2024). Technology integration and teachers’ competency in the development of 21st-century learning in EFL classroom. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 18(2), 342–349. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v18i2.21069
OECD. (2019). OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030: OECD Learning Compass 2030. OECD Publishing.
Opfer, V. D., & Pedder, D. (2011). Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 376–407. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311413609
Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08321509
Saleem, N., Mufti, T., Sohail, S. S., & Madsen, D. Ø. (2024). ChatGPT as an innovative heutagogical tool in medical education. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2332850. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2332850
Setuju, Triyono, B., Muhtadi, A., & Widowati, A. (2022). Mobile application smartphone: Does it improve the 21st century’s competence of vocational school students? International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 12(12), 1286–1290. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2022.12.12.1752
Sherly, Gultom, S., Daryanto, E., & Nasrun. (2023). Management of continuous professional development through competency-based training model for junior high school teachers. Emerging Science Journal, 7(1), 190–206. https://doi.org/10.28991/ESJ-2023-07-01-014
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
Sugiyono. (2016). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan kombinasi (mixed methods). Alfabeta.
Thuneberg, H., Salmi, H., Vainikainen, M.-P., Hienonen, N., & Hautamäki, J. (2022). New curriculum towards big ideas in science education. Teachers and Teaching, 28(4), 440–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2022.2062739
Yaccob, N. S., Yunus, M. M., & Hashim, H. (2022). Globally competent teachers: English as a second language teachers’ perceptions on global competence in English lessons. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 925160. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.925160
Zamora, J. T., & Zamora, J. J. M. (2022). 21st century teaching skills and teaching standards competence level of teacher. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(5), 220–238. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.5.12
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Devy Yulistiawati, Aan Komariah, Asep Suryana, Nur Aedi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
