The Pedagogy of Abandonment: Why Faculty Dropped Digital Tools They Were Trained to Use

Following the pandemic, higher education institutions invested heavily in training faculty to use digital tools, yet many instructors subsequently abandoned these technologies once face-to-face teaching resumed. This qualitative pilot study examines why trained faculty consciously discontinued digital tools, framing abandonment as a rational pedagogical decision rather than resistance or incompetence. Drawing on Rogers’ concept of discontinuance and Expectancy–Value Theory, the study analyzes open-ended responses from a purposive sample of five university professors across Southern Europe. Thematic analysis identifies three dominant drivers of abandonment: low pedagogical return on investment, excessive time and workload demands, and contextual or institutional constraints. Faculty report discontinuing tools that increased instructional complexity without yielding clear learning benefits, as well as interactive features perceived as producing superficial engagement. Abandonment is thus interpreted as a form of quality control, privileging sustainability, authenticity, and efficiency over technological novelty. The findings suggest that digital competence alone does not ensure adoption; instead, tools must demonstrably enhance learning or reduce workload to be retained. Although exploratory, the study reframes post-pandemic “tool rejection” as an indicator of pedagogical maturity rather than regression, with implications for sustainable digital innovation strategies.