When reflecting on “learner responsibilities” in technology adoption, I no longer see them as mere actions like trying the tool or watching tutorials. After examining Kang (2025) and reviewing the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and its extensions, TAM2 and TAM3, I now interpret learner responsibilities as internal growth efforts—mindset shifts that empower adults to integrate new technologies effectively into their learning processes.
To set the stage, the figure below illustrates how TAM constructs and
adult learning theories orbit around the learner. It is not meant to be a
precise causal diagram, but rather a conceptual mood-setter that highlights the
cognitive and emotional dimensions of adoption.
Figure 1
Conceptual Sketch of the Learner's Dual Responsibilities in Technology Adoption
 |
Note. Conceptual sketch showing the learner centered among TAM-related factors that influence technology adoption. Image generated by Microsoft Copilot (Microsoft, 2026) using a prompt requesting a sketch of a learner looking at an office building surrounded by TAM, TAM2, and TAM3 constructs. |
This week, two responsibilities stood out:
- Actively
constructing relevance and
- Proactively shaping one’s emotional connection with technology.
1. Learners must actively construct relevance (not wait for it).
Kang (2025) suggests that meaningful technology integration begins when learners intentionally connect tools to their personal learning objectives. This aligns with TAM2, which shows that job relevance significantly influences perceived usefulness, especially when paired with output quality (Venkatesh & Davis, 2000).
In essence:
Adults are more likely to adopt technology when they can see its clear benefits in helping them achieve what matters to them.
But instructors cannot fully provide relevance. Learners must:
- articulate their own goals
- map the tool to those goals
- test whether the tool actually helps
This demonstrates andragogical self-direction: adults learn most effectively when their learning is connected to real-life needs (Knowles, 1984).
2. Learners need to maintain a healthy emotional connection with technology.
TAM3 broadened the model by emphasizing emotional aspects like computer
anxiety, playfulness, enjoyment, and self-efficacy (Venkatesh & Bala,
2008). These are not merely technical concerns — they relate to identity.
Adults carry their past experiences, fears, and confidence into each new
tool they encounter. Kang (2025) notes that learners often feel discomfort,
uncertainty, and vulnerability when engaging with new technologies. This
supports Mezirow’s (1991) notion that transformative learning entails facing
disorienting dilemmas, and technology can often be one such challenge.
Akpan (TEDx Talks, 2020) illustrates how everyday technology use generates anxiety — separation from a smartphone, fear of missing out, social comparison — the same emotional terrain TAM3 identifies as shaping perceived ease of use.
Learners must take responsibility for managing the emotions that shape their perception of ease of use:
- acknowledging anxiety
- seeking support early
- allowing low-stakes experimentation
- building confidence through small wins
Integrating Both Responsibilities: A Learner Journey
To help visualize how learners can take on these responsibilities, I
created a second figure outlining a single, supportive path toward technology
confidence. It integrates TAM, adult learning theories, and concrete learner
actions.
Figure 2
Learner's Path to Tech Confidence
 |
| Note. Conceptual sketch showing a learner's journey toward technology confidence across five stages: recognizing relevance (Knowles, 1984), experimenting and adapting (Mezirow, 1991), testing and reflecting (TAM2; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000), reflecting together (TAM3; Venkatesh & Bala, 2008), and building confidence. Image generated by Microsoft Copilot (Microsoft, 2026) using a prompt requesting a hand-drawn sketch of a learner walking a winding path toward a summit, surrounded by five labeled stages of technology adoption. |
This journey shows that while learners hold responsibilities, they are not meant to walk alone. Support is essential.
Why These Responsibilities Matter for Adult Education
Together, these responsibilities highlight a core truth:
Adopting technology is not merely a technical task — it is a process of
shaping meaning.
Learners face the cognitive task of assessing relevance and the emotional
challenge of building confidence. TAM indicates that perceptions, rather than
design alone, influence usefulness and ease of use. Kang (2025) highlights that
meaningful integration relies on learners actively constructing their
understanding.
A Question for My Classmates
What has been the most challenging emotional or cognitive responsibility
you have faced when adopting a new learning technology, and how have you
managed it?
References
Kang, H. (2025). Adult learning and meaningful technology integration
(2nd ed.). New Prairie Press.
Knowles, M. (1984). The adult learner: A neglected species (3rd
ed.). Gulf Publishing.
Microsoft. (2026). Copilot [Generative AI tool]. https://copilot.microsoft.com
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning.
Jossey-Bass.
TEDx Talks. (2020, May 6). Technology anxiety: Hate liking for dummies | Mfon Akpan | TEDxAllendaleColumbiaSchool [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qd3px40lYDs
Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39(2), 273–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2008.00192.x
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the
technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management
Science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926
HelloTwoHomeLnadsOneHeart.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your thoughtful question. One of the most challenging emotional responsibilities I have faced when adopting a new learning technology is managing the tension between excitement and anxiety. I am usually eager to embrace new technology when I can see clear benefits, especially if it improves efficiency and reduces workload. For example, when I worked as a human service practitioner, all case documentation was completed by hand. The process was time-consuming and often overwhelming. I dedicated an entire day each week to writing case notes, and documentation became one of the most dreaded parts of my job.
Fortunately, our agency received a grant to implement an electronic database for documenting participant interactions. The transition required learning a new system, but the benefits quickly became apparent. We no longer had to maintain paper files, report generation became much easier, and I was able to keep case notes current with far less effort. This experience reinforced the idea that perceived usefulness is a major factor in technology adoption because when individuals see a direct benefit to their work, they are more likely to embrace change (Lee & Coughlin, 2015).
However, not all technology transitions have been as smooth. A more recent example was my reluctance to adopt Microsoft Teams after using Zoom for several years. I was comfortable with Zoom and found it intuitive, whereas Teams initially felt more difficult to navigate. My hesitation stemmed from leaving a familiar system and investing time and effort into learning a new one. Research suggests that technology adoption can trigger negative emotional responses such as frustration, anxiety, and resistance to change, particularly when users feel that a new technology disrupts established routines (Agogo & Hess, 2018).
To manage these challenges, I remind myself to focus on the long-term benefits rather than the short-term discomfort of learning something new. I also give myself time to experiment with new tools and recognize that becoming proficient takes practice. While I generally embrace change, adopting new technology can sometimes feel like an additional responsibility when balancing multiple competing demands. Ultimately, my willingness to adapt depends on how the technology will impact my work, the time required to learn it, and whether the benefits outweigh the temporary discomfort of stepping outside my comfort zone.
References
Agogo, D., & Hess, T. J. (2018). How does tech make you feel? A review and examination of negative affective responses to technology use. European Journal of Information Systems, 27(5), 570-599.
Lee, C., & Coughlin, J. F. (2015). Perspective: Older adults' adoption of technology: An integrated approach to identifying determinants and barriers. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(5), 747-759.
Hello Dr. E. Mead: Tech with Purpose,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your insightful response. I especially relate to the tension between excitement and anxiety you mentioned, particularly with the Teams/Zoom example, because my experience was quite the opposite. I first learned Microsoft Teams during the pandemic, when my workplace adopted it out of necessity. It quickly became second nature because it was essential for maintaining my job during a confusing time. When I started this master's program, I had to learn Zoom for the first time, and I felt some of that same friction you described — not because Zoom is more difficult, but because I already had a functional system that worked for me, and switching initially seemed like unnecessary extra effort.
It's interesting how the order of transition doesn't really affect the outcome — what matters is which tool was perceived as the "default" first. Kang (2025) highlights a similar idea about analogy-bridging: learners tend to become comfortable with a new tool by relating it to something familiar, and this comparison influences how effortful the new tool seems. For you, Zoom was the initial anchor, making Teams feel like the more difficult option; for me, it was the opposite. Neither tool was objectively better or worse, only which one served as the initial reference point.
I think that's a good reminder for our own instructional design thinking too — when we introduce new technology to learners, the resistance we see may say less about the tool's actual usefulness and more about how deeply embedded the learner's current habit already is.
Reference
Kang, H. (2025). Adult learning and meaningful technology integration (2nd ed.). New Prairie Press.