The integration of technology into educational settings has revolutionized traditional learning methods, creating new opportunities for personalized and engaging learning experiences. However, the successful implementation and maximization of technology-enhanced learning (TEL) require the active involvement of educators and professionals. This study explores the critical role of educators and other educational professionals in shaping and influencing the effectiveness of TEL. By examining key influential factors such as professional development, teacher attitudes toward technology, institutional support, and collaboration among educators, the research aims to identify strategies for unlocking the full potential of TEL. Drawing on insights from various educational settings, the study highlights how educators' knowledge, skills, and willingness to adapt to technological changes are essential for fostering successful technology integration in the classroom. The findings suggest that continuous professional development, collaborative learning environments, and strong institutional support structures are necessary to overcome challenges and enhance the impact of TEL on student learning outcomes. This research provides valuable recommendations for educators, policymakers, and institutions seeking to create an effective, technology-enhanced educational ecosystem.

Technology-Enhanced Learning (TEL), Educators' role, Professional development

Acevedo, M. and Krueger, J.I. (2004), “Two egocentric sources of the decision to vote: the voter’s illusion and the belief in personal relevance”, Political Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 115-134.

Alsabawy, A.Y., Cater-Steel, A. and Soar, J. (2016), “Determinants of perceived usefulness of e-learning systems”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 64, November, pp. 843-858.

Bateman, S., Brooks, C., McCalla, G. and Brusilovsky, P. (2007), Applying Collaborative Tagging to E-Learning, Banff, Alberta.

Bekebrede, G., Warmelink, H. and Mayer, I.S. (2011), “Reviewing the need for gaming in education to accommodate the net generation”, Computers & Education, Vol. 57 No. 2, pp. 1521-1529.

Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H. and Krathwohl, D.R. (1956), Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook I: Cognitive Domain, David McKay Company, New York, NY.

Branch, R.M. and Merrill, M.D. (2012), “Chapter 2: characteristics of instructional design models”, in Reiser, R.A. (Ed.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology, 3rd ed., international ed., Pearson, Boston, MA., pp. 8-16.

Bratengeyer, E., Steinbacher, H.-P. and Friesenbichler, M. (2016), “Die österreichische Hochschul-E- Learning-Landschaft: Studie zur Erfassung des Status quo der E-Learning-Landschaft im tertiären Bildungsbereich hinsichtlich Strategie”, Ressourcen, Organisation und Erfahrungen.

Brosius, F. (1999), SPSS 8.0: Professionelle Statistik unter Windows, Aufl, Nachdr, MITP-Verl, Bonn.

Bullen, M. and Morgan, T. (2011), “Digital learners not digital natives”, La Cuestión Universitaria, Vol. 7, pp. 60-68.

Chan, T.-W., Roschelle, J., Hsi, S., Kinshuk, Sharples, M., Brown, T., Patton, C., Cherniavsky, J., Pea, R., Norris, C., Soloway, E., Balacheff, N., Scardamalia, M., Dillenbourg, P., Looi, C.-K., Milrad, M. and Hoppe, U. (2006), “One-to-one technology-enhanced learning: an opportunity for global research collaboration”, Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 3-29.