digital education thesis

Digital transformation in education: A mixed methods study of teachers and systems

Files and links (1).

Home > USC Columbia > Education, College of > Educational Studies > Educational Studies Theses and Dissertations

Educational Studies Theses and Dissertations

Theses/dissertations from 2023 2023.

Centering the Teacher: How an Autonomy-Supportive Environment Impacts Arts Educators’ Sense of Agency and the Collaborative Culture of Their Education Networks , Kyle Andrew Anderson

Effects of a Self-Monitoring Tracking System Combined With Blended Learning Intervention Time on Students’ Self-Regulated Learning Skills And Academic Performance , Jennifer E. Augustine

The Integration Of Simulation-enhanced Interprofessional Education Into Undergraduate Clinical Laboratory Science Curriculum , Dana Powell Baker

Reading Strategies: Impact on Fifth Grade African American Males’ Reading Comprehension and Motivation to Read , Patrice Antoinette Barrett

Tip of the Iceberg in Changing School Culture: Acknowledging and Addressing Microaggressions , Nicole Lauren Becker

The Impact of Ability Grouping on Academic Achievement in Elementary Reading , Kristi Bissell

Impacts of Technology-Enhanced Dual Enrollment Mathematics Course on Rural High School Students’ Intentions of Going to College , Nicolae Bordieanu

Educative Curricular Supports Used to Improve High Cognitive Demand Task Implementation in High-Dosage Mathematics Tutorial , Halley Bowman

Creating a Culturally Inclusive American Literature Classroom , Holly R. Bradshaw

The Impact of a Series of Professional Development Sessions on Culturally Responsive Pedagogy (CRP) on the Awareness Level of Seven Teachers at a Suburban High School , Charity Jo Brady

The Effects of Gamified Peer Feedback on Student Writing in High School English Language Arts , Kerise Amaris Broome

Evaluating the Impact of Personalized Professional Learning on Technology Integration in the Classroom , Angela Bishop Burgess

An Exploration of Perinatal Stress and Associated Mental Health of Transitioning First-Time Fathers , Timothy Reed Burkhalter

A Study of Computational Thinking Skills and Attitudes Towards Computer Science with Middle School Students , Lorien W. Cafarella

Using Critical Reflection to Mitigate Racial Implicit Bias and Enhance Cultural Humility: A Nursing Faculty Action Research Study , Teresa Stafford Cronell

Mitigating Student Anxiety in the Secondary Classroom: A Culturally Sustaining Approach , Erin Hawley Cronin

Daily Activities and Routines: A Comparative Case Study of the Home Language and Literacy Environment of Spanish-Speaking Toddlers With and Without Older Siblings , Eugenia Crosby-Quinatoa

Supporting Improvement In Academic Outcomes And Self-efficacy For Black Male Varsity Athletes , Katherine Currie

Online Professional Development’s Effect on Teachers’ Technology Self-Efficacy and Continuance Intention to Use Pear Deck , Katherine Shirley Degar

Empowering Teachers to Support MTSS Students: An Action Research Study , Sahalija Dentico

Multisensory Phonics Instruction in Struggling Readers , Amanda M. Dixon

Student Engagement Action Research a Focus on Culturally Relevant Instructional Methods , Amia Dixon

Instructional Coaching: A Support for Increasing Engagement in Middle School Mathematics , Christi Ritchie Edwards

A Holistic View of Integrated Care Within Counselor Education: A Multi-Manuscript Dissertation , Alexander McClain Fields

Faculty Perceptions of Readiness and Confidence for Teaching Online: An Evaluation of Online Professional Development , Kevin Brent Forman

The Effect Of Instructionally Embedded Cognitive Reframing On Students’ Self-beliefs Of Their Mathematical Competence , Kelly Eyre Frazee

An Examination of Physical Literacy: Learning Through A Technology Integrated, Flipped Classroom Approach. , Euan M. S. Frew

Increasing Phonemic Awareness in Intellectually Impaired Students by Using Wilson’s Fundations Phonics Program in a Self-Contained Classroom , Theresa Lynne Garcia

A Causal Comparative Study of the Effects of Physical Activity Course Enrollment on College Students’ Perceived Wellness, Mental Health, and Basic Psychological Needs , Genee’ Regina Glascoe

The Effect of Computer-Based Learning Modules on Pre-Algebra Student Proficiency and Self-Efficacy in Manipulating Math Expressions Involving Negative Signs , Brian Charles Grimm

Exploring Literary Responses to Culturally Relevant Texts Through an AsianCrit Lens: A Collective Case Study of Chinese American Students in a Community-Based Book Club , Wenyu Guo

Building Leadership Capacity to Support International Educators: A Professional Learning Series , Amanda Hajji Minnillo

Unveiling The Lifeworld Of Educators' Social Justice Journeys: A Phenomenological Investigation , Maria Rocas Halkias

The Influence and Impacts of Critical Literacy Intervention in Preservice Teachers Culturally Responsive Teaching Self-Efficacy: A Mixed Methods Study , Heather Lynn Hall

Stories From North Carolina Teachers of Color: An Inquiry of Racialized Experiences in the Workplace. , Deborah Stephanie Harrison

Electronic Portfolios in a High School Community of Practice: Action Research Exploring Writing Experiences in an Advanced Placement Writing Course , Archibald Franklin Harrison IV

The Effects of Problem-Based Learning on Mathematics Motivation in a Flipped Classroom Instructional Environment , Joshua David Harrison

University, City, and Community: Athletics Urban Renewal Projects and the University of South Carolina’s Carolina Coliseum and Blatt Physical Education Center, 1964–1971 , Theresa M. Harrison

Stories from North Carolina Teachers of Color: An Inquiry of Racialized Experiences in the Workplace. , Deborah Stephanie Harrisson

Examining The Perceptions And Knowledge Of School Administrators In Special Education , Maranda Hayward

Supporting Black Students in Sixth-Grade Science Through a Social Constructivist Approach: A Mixed-Methods Action Research Study , Kirk Anthony Heath

Effects of Choice Reading on Intrinsic Motivation in Underperforming Sixth-Grade Students , Heather M. Henderson

Academic Success and Student Development in the Health Professions: An Action Research Study , Molly Ellen Higbie

Deficit Thinking in Teacher Course Level Recommendations , Andrew Hogan

Increasing English Progress Proficiency of Multilingual Learners Utilizing Improvement Science , Stephanie Corley Huckabee

The Impact of Cognitive Coaching on High School English Teachers’ Implementation of Metacognitve Reading Strategies , Charrai Hunter

Digital Literacy Integrated Into Academic Content Through the Collaboration of a Librarian and a Core Content Teacher , Jeri Leann Jeffcoat

The Effects of Hip-Hop and Rap Music Intervention to Improve the Wellbeing of Black and African American Men , Lanita Michelle Jefferson

The Effects of Learner-Centered Professional Development and Supporting Effective Teaching Practices in Elementary-Level Professional Learning Communities , Lisa Suther Johnson

Examining the Relationship Between Multicultural Training and Cultural Humility Development in CACREP-Accredited Counselor Education Programs , Sabrina Monique Johnson

Multimodal Digital Literacy Practices: Perspectives of L2 Academic Writing Instructors , Priscila Jovazino Bastos Medrado Costa

Using Yoga, Meditation, and Art Therapy to Combat Complex Trauma and Promote Social–Emotional Learning in the Art Room , Karen Emory Kelly

Perspectives, Motivations, and Resistance: Investigating Employee Responses to Employer-Sponsored Diversity Training , Robert Kerlin

STEM Educators’ Perceptions of Gender Bias and the Contributing Factors That Persist for Women in STEM Education , Haleigh Nicole Kirkland

A Qualitative Study Examining and Comparing Families’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of School Readiness , Shalonya Cerika Knotts

The Impact of Differentiated Affective Curriculum on the Asynchronous Social and Emotional Development of Gifted Elementary Students , Michelle Koehle

Supporting Self-efficacy Through Mindset: The Impact Of A Growth Mindset Innovation On The Self-efficacy Of Middle School Students In A Teen Leadership Course , Shannon J. Kojah

The Evolution of Contextualized, Discourse-based Professional Development to Support Elementary Teachers in the Implementation of Conceptual Mathematical Teaching Practices , Jennifer Aren Kueter

A Critical Examination Of An in Class Tabata Based Physical Fitness Protocol on Student Engagement Levels in a Sixth Grade Math Class , Justin R. Kulik

Mathematics Teachers’ Attitudes and Intentions Towards Instructional Videos as Part of a Flipped Learning Model , Jessica Lee Lambert

Reimagining Parent-teacher Relationships Through Human Centered Design , Andrea Lynn Lance

Increasing Math Knowledge in 3 rd Grade: Evaluating Student Use & Teacher Perceptions of Imagine Math , Paoze Lee

Utilizing Case Studies to Increase Critical Thinking in an Undergraduate Anatomy & Physiology Classroom , Sarah E. Lehman

Exploring Chinese International Students’ Motivational Factors in Non-Mandatory Event Participation , Aimin Liao

Preparing In-Service Elementary Teachers to Support English Language Learners: A Qualitative Case Study of a Job-Embedded Professional Development Using TPACK , Rachel Theresa Lopez

Impact of Virtual Models on Students’ Multilevel Understanding of an Organic Reaction , Eli Martin

Weathering the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Study Examining How the Lived Experience Affected English Learners , Mary Kathryn Maxwell

Racial Orientations: A Phenomenological Approach , Nicholas Mazur

Measuring the Impact of Peer Coaching on Teacher Effectiveness at Friendship County High School , Whittney Michele McPherson

The Effects of Technology Integration on Academic Performance and Engagement of Third Grade Social Studies Students: A Mixed Methods Study , Ashley Megregian

Beyond The Acronym Of Stem: Experiential Learning Professional Development For Integrative Stem Education , Christine Mitchell

Counter-Stories From Former Foster Youth: College Graduates Disrupting the Dominant Narrative , Amanda May Moon

Supporting LGBTQ+ ELA Students Through Action Research , Nicole Mustaccio

What Are They Thinking?: A Qualitative Study of Secondary Students’ Critical Thinking in Online Classes , Scott Allan Nolt

Impact of the Engineering Design Process on Rural Female Students’ Achievement and Self-Efficacy , Whitney Lowery Oberndorf

Shakespeare in Virtual Reality: Social Presence of Students in a Virtual Reality Book Club , John Funchess Ott Jr.

Teacher Observations as Professional Development Opportunities , Ashton Carrie Padgett

Reading Motivation and Retrieval Practice of United States Undergraduates Aged 18 to 23 , Robyn M. Pernetti

A Descriptive Study of Factors That Support and Hinder Classroom Discourse With English Learners , Jillian Camille Plum

Implementing Meaningful Problem-Based Learning in a Middle School Science Classroom , Celestine Banks Pough

Coaching to Success: Moving From a Fixed Mindset to a Growth Mindset Through Positive Motivation , Shannon Dianna Ramirez

Critical Literacy and Student Engagement: Disrupting the Canon in the Secondary English Classroom , Katherine Burdick Ramp

Pursuing Culturally Responsive Math Teaching By Secondary Math Educators: A Professional Development Action Research Study , Emily Bell Redding

The Impact of a Literacy Program on Summer Reading Setback: Providing Access to Books and Project-Based Learning , Tiffany Gayle Robles

Decentering the White Gaze: The Effects of Involving African-American Students in Curricular Decision-Making in an Independent School Library , Michelle Efird Rosen

Critical Literacy And Self Efficacy Among Secondary Students Repeatedly Engaged In Literacy Intervention , Haley Rowles

Transforming Lessons And Those Who Write Them: Professional Development For Educational Content Writers To Integrate Technology Into Lessons Using The Tpack Framework , Rachael Patricia Santopietro

An Examination of Semester-Long Review of Behavior Referral Data at a High School in a Southeastern State , Shalanda L. Shuler

Instructional Hub: Bridging the Gap in Teacher Preparation for Online Instruction , Charity Beth Simmons

The Impact of the Flipped Classroom Model on Elementary Students’ Achievement and Motivation for Learning Geometry , Kimberly M. Smalls

If Not Me, Then Who? A Study of Racial and Cultural Competence in a High School English Department , DiAnna Sox

“So, the World Isn’t Just Old White Guys?”: Student and Teacher Experiences in a Culturally Relevant Advanced Placement Chemistry Class , James Thomas Sox

1, 2, 3: Counting on Problem Based Learning to Improve Mathematical Achievement in African American Students , Kelley P. Spahr

The Use of Project-Based Learning to Scaffold Student Social and Emotional Learning Skill Development, Science Identity, and Science Self-Efficacy , Michelle Sutton Spigner

How Do the Students Feel? Long-Term English Learners and Their Experience Under the ESL Label , Molly M. Staeheli

My Journey Toward A Culturally Relevant Music Pedagogy , Adam Michael Steele

Implementation of Digital Flashcards to Increase Content-Specific Vocabulary Knowledge and Perceptions of Motivation and Self-Efficacy in an Eleventh-Grade U.S. History Course: An Action Research Study , Jill Lee Steinmeyer

Family Therapy, K-12 Public Education, and Discipline Risk: A Scoping Review and Relationship Analysis Multiple Manuscript Dissertation , Cara Melinda Thompson

The Impact of Extended Professional Development in Project-Based Learning on Middle School Science Teachers , Margrett Caroline Upchurch-Ford

A Qualitative Study on Mental Health Resource Utilization of Enlisted Airmen During the COVID-19 Pandemic , Hassahn Khali Wade

Page 1 of 8

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Collections
• Disciplines

Submissions

• Give us Feedback
• University Libraries

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools' digital capacity and transformation: A literature review

Stella timotheou.

1 CYENS Center of Excellence & Cyprus University of Technology (Cyprus Interaction Lab), Cyprus, CYENS Center of Excellence & Cyprus University of Technology, Nicosia-Limassol, Cyprus

Ourania Miliou

Yiannis dimitriadis.

2 Universidad de Valladolid (UVA), Spain, Valladolid, Spain

Sara Villagrá Sobrino

Nikoleta giannoutsou, romina cachia.

3 JRC - Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, Seville, Spain

Alejandra Martínez Monés

Andri ioannou, associated data.

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Digital technologies have brought changes to the nature and scope of education and led education systems worldwide to adopt strategies and policies for ICT integration. The latter brought about issues regarding the quality of teaching and learning with ICTs, especially concerning the understanding, adaptation, and design of the education systems in accordance with current technological trends. These issues were emphasized during the recent COVID-19 pandemic that accelerated the use of digital technologies in education, generating questions regarding digitalization in schools. Specifically, many schools demonstrated a lack of experience and low digital capacity, which resulted in widening gaps, inequalities, and learning losses. Such results have engendered the need for schools to learn and build upon the experience to enhance their digital capacity and preparedness, increase their digitalization levels, and achieve a successful digital transformation. Given that the integration of digital technologies is a complex and continuous process that impacts different actors within the school ecosystem, there is a need to show how these impacts are interconnected and identify the factors that can encourage an effective and efficient change in the school environments. For this purpose, we conducted a non-systematic literature review. The results of the literature review were organized thematically based on the evidence presented about the impact of digital technology on education and the factors that affect the schools’ digital capacity and digital transformation. The findings suggest that ICT integration in schools impacts more than just students’ performance; it affects several other school-related aspects and stakeholders, too. Furthermore, various factors affect the impact of digital technologies on education. These factors are interconnected and play a vital role in the digital transformation process. The study results shed light on how ICTs can positively contribute to the digital transformation of schools and which factors should be considered for schools to achieve effective and efficient change.

Introduction

Digital technologies have brought changes to the nature and scope of education. Versatile and disruptive technological innovations, such as smart devices, the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR), blockchain, and software applications have opened up new opportunities for advancing teaching and learning (Gaol & Prasolova-Førland, 2021 ; OECD, 2021 ). Hence, in recent years, education systems worldwide have increased their investment in the integration of information and communication technology (ICT) (Fernández-Gutiérrez et al., 2020 ; Lawrence & Tar, 2018 ) and prioritized their educational agendas to adapt strategies or policies around ICT integration (European Commission, 2019 ). The latter brought about issues regarding the quality of teaching and learning with ICTs (Bates, 2015 ), especially concerning the understanding, adaptation, and design of education systems in accordance with current technological trends (Balyer & Öz, 2018 ). Studies have shown that despite the investment made in the integration of technology in schools, the results have not been promising, and the intended outcomes have not yet been achieved (Delgado et al., 2015 ; Lawrence & Tar, 2018 ). These issues were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced teaching across education levels to move online (Daniel, 2020 ). Online teaching accelerated the use of digital technologies generating questions regarding the process, the nature, the extent, and the effectiveness of digitalization in schools (Cachia et al., 2021 ; König et al., 2020 ). Specifically, many schools demonstrated a lack of experience and low digital capacity, which resulted in widening gaps, inequalities, and learning losses (Blaskó et al., 2021 ; Di Pietro et al, 2020 ). Such results have engendered the need for schools to learn and build upon the experience in order to enhance their digital capacity (European Commission, 2020 ) and increase their digitalization levels (Costa et al., 2021 ). Digitalization offers possibilities for fundamental improvement in schools (OECD, 2021 ; Rott & Marouane, 2018 ) and touches many aspects of a school’s development (Delcker & Ifenthaler, 2021 ) . However, it is a complex process that requires large-scale transformative changes beyond the technical aspects of technology and infrastructure (Pettersson, 2021 ). Namely, digitalization refers to “ a series of deep and coordinated culture, workforce, and technology shifts and operating models ” (Brooks & McCormack, 2020 , p. 3) that brings cultural, organizational, and operational change through the integration of digital technologies (JISC, 2020 ). A successful digital transformation requires that schools increase their digital capacity levels, establishing the necessary “ culture, policies, infrastructure as well as digital competence of students and staff to support the effective integration of technology in teaching and learning practices ” (Costa et al, 2021 , p.163).

Given that the integration of digital technologies is a complex and continuous process that impacts different actors within the school ecosystem (Eng, 2005 ), there is a need to show how the different elements of the impact are interconnected and to identify the factors that can encourage an effective and efficient change in the school environment. To address the issues outlined above, we formulated the following research questions:

a) What is the impact of digital technologies on education?

b) Which factors might affect a school’s digital capacity and transformation?

In the present investigation, we conducted a non-systematic literature review of publications pertaining to the impact of digital technologies on education and the factors that affect a school’s digital capacity and transformation. The results of the literature review were organized thematically based on the evidence presented about the impact of digital technology on education and the factors which affect the schools’ digital capacity and digital transformation.

Methodology

The non-systematic literature review presented herein covers the main theories and research published over the past 17 years on the topic. It is based on meta-analyses and review papers found in scholarly, peer-reviewed content databases and other key studies and reports related to the concepts studied (e.g., digitalization, digital capacity) from professional and international bodies (e.g., the OECD). We searched the Scopus database, which indexes various online journals in the education sector with an international scope, to collect peer-reviewed academic papers. Furthermore, we used an all-inclusive Google Scholar search to include relevant key terms or to include studies found in the reference list of the peer-reviewed papers, and other key studies and reports related to the concepts studied by professional and international bodies. Lastly, we gathered sources from the Publications Office of the European Union ( https://op.europa.eu/en/home ); namely, documents that refer to policies related to digital transformation in education.

Regarding search terms, we first searched resources on the impact of digital technologies on education by performing the following search queries: “impact” OR “effects” AND “digital technologies” AND “education”, “impact” OR “effects” AND “ICT” AND “education”. We further refined our results by adding the terms “meta-analysis” and “review” or by adjusting the search options based on the features of each database to avoid collecting individual studies that would provide limited contributions to a particular domain. We relied on meta-analyses and review studies as these consider the findings of multiple studies to offer a more comprehensive view of the research in a given area (Schuele & Justice, 2006 ). Specifically, meta-analysis studies provided quantitative evidence based on statistically verifiable results regarding the impact of educational interventions that integrate digital technologies in school classrooms (Higgins et al., 2012 ; Tolani-Brown et al., 2011 ).

However, quantitative data does not offer explanations for the challenges or difficulties experienced during ICT integration in learning and teaching (Tolani-Brown et al., 2011 ). To fill this gap, we analyzed literature reviews and gathered in-depth qualitative evidence of the benefits and implications of technology integration in schools. In the analysis presented herein, we also included policy documents and reports from professional and international bodies and governmental reports, which offered useful explanations of the key concepts of this study and provided recent evidence on digital capacity and transformation in education along with policy recommendations. The inclusion and exclusion criteria that were considered in this study are presented in Table ​ Table1 1 .

Inclusion and exclusion criteria for the selection of resources on the impact of digital technologies on education

To ensure a reliable extraction of information from each study and assist the research synthesis we selected the study characteristics of interest (impact) and constructed coding forms. First, an overview of the synthesis was provided by the principal investigator who described the processes of coding, data entry, and data management. The coders followed the same set of instructions but worked independently. To ensure a common understanding of the process between coders, a sample of ten studies was tested. The results were compared, and the discrepancies were identified and resolved. Additionally, to ensure an efficient coding process, all coders participated in group meetings to discuss additions, deletions, and modifications (Stock, 1994 ). Due to the methodological diversity of the studied documents we began to synthesize the literature review findings based on similar study designs. Specifically, most of the meta-analysis studies were grouped in one category due to the quantitative nature of the measured impact. These studies tended to refer to student achievement (Hattie et al., 2014 ). Then, we organized the themes of the qualitative studies in several impact categories. Lastly, we synthesized both review and meta-analysis data across the categories. In order to establish a collective understanding of the concept of impact, we referred to a previous impact study by Balanskat ( 2009 ) which investigated the impact of technology in primary schools. In this context, the impact had a more specific ICT-related meaning and was described as “ a significant influence or effect of ICT on the measured or perceived quality of (parts of) education ” (Balanskat, 2009 , p. 9). In the study presented herein, the main impacts are in relation to learning and learners, teaching, and teachers, as well as other key stakeholders who are directly or indirectly connected to the school unit.

The study’s results identified multiple dimensions of the impact of digital technologies on students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes; on equality, inclusion, and social integration; on teachers’ professional and teaching practices; and on other school-related aspects and stakeholders. The data analysis indicated various factors that might affect the schools’ digital capacity and transformation, such as digital competencies, the teachers’ personal characteristics and professional development, as well as the school’s leadership and management, administration, infrastructure, etc. The impacts and factors found in the literature review are presented below.

Impacts of digital technologies on students’ knowledge, skills, attitudes, and emotions

The impact of ICT use on students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes has been investigated early in the literature. Eng ( 2005 ) found a small positive effect between ICT use and students' learning. Specifically, the author reported that access to computer-assisted instruction (CAI) programs in simulation or tutorial modes—used to supplement rather than substitute instruction – could enhance student learning. The author reported studies showing that teachers acknowledged the benefits of ICT on pupils with special educational needs; however, the impact of ICT on students' attainment was unclear. Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ) found a statistically significant positive association between ICT use and higher student achievement in primary and secondary education. The authors also reported improvements in the performance of low-achieving pupils. The use of ICT resulted in further positive gains for students, namely increased attention, engagement, motivation, communication and process skills, teamwork, and gains related to their behaviour towards learning. Evidence from qualitative studies showed that teachers, students, and parents recognized the positive impact of ICT on students' learning regardless of their competence level (strong/weak students). Punie et al. ( 2006 ) documented studies that showed positive results of ICT-based learning for supporting low-achieving pupils and young people with complex lives outside the education system. Liao et al. ( 2007 ) reported moderate positive effects of computer application instruction (CAI, computer simulations, and web-based learning) over traditional instruction on primary school student's achievement. Similarly, Tamim et al. ( 2011 ) reported small to moderate positive effects between the use of computer technology (CAI, ICT, simulations, computer-based instruction, digital and hypermedia) and student achievement in formal face-to-face classrooms compared to classrooms that did not use technology. Jewitt et al., ( 2011 ) found that the use of learning platforms (LPs) (virtual learning environments, management information systems, communication technologies, and information- and resource-sharing technologies) in schools allowed primary and secondary students to access a wider variety of quality learning resources, engage in independent and personalized learning, and conduct self- and peer-review; LPs also provide opportunities for teacher assessment and feedback. Similar findings were reported by Fu ( 2013 ), who documented a list of benefits and opportunities of ICT use. According to the author, the use of ICTs helps students access digital information and course content effectively and efficiently, supports student-centered and self-directed learning, as well as the development of a creative learning environment where more opportunities for critical thinking skills are offered, and promotes collaborative learning in a distance-learning environment. Higgins et al. ( 2012 ) found consistent but small positive associations between the use of technology and learning outcomes of school-age learners (5–18-year-olds) in studies linking the provision and use of technology with attainment. Additionally, Chauhan ( 2017 ) reported a medium positive effect of technology on the learning effectiveness of primary school students compared to students who followed traditional learning instruction.

The rise of mobile technologies and hardware devices instigated investigations into their impact on teaching and learning. Sung et al. ( 2016 ) reported a moderate effect on students' performance from the use of mobile devices in the classroom compared to the use of desktop computers or the non-use of mobile devices. Schmid et al. ( 2014 ) reported medium–low to low positive effects of technology integration (e.g., CAI, ICTs) in the classroom on students' achievement and attitude compared to not using technology or using technology to varying degrees. Tamim et al. ( 2015 ) found a low statistically significant effect of the use of tablets and other smart devices in educational contexts on students' achievement outcomes. The authors suggested that tablets offered additional advantages to students; namely, they reported improvements in students’ notetaking, organizational and communication skills, and creativity. Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) reported a small positive effect of one-to-one laptop programs on students’ academic achievement across subject areas. Additional reported benefits included student-centered, individualized, and project-based learning enhanced learner engagement and enthusiasm. Additionally, the authors found that students using one-to-one laptop programs tended to use technology more frequently than in non-laptop classrooms, and as a result, they developed a range of skills (e.g., information skills, media skills, technology skills, organizational skills). Haßler et al. ( 2016 ) found that most interventions that included the use of tablets across the curriculum reported positive learning outcomes. However, from 23 studies, five reported no differences, and two reported a negative effect on students' learning outcomes. Similar results were indicated by Kalati and Kim ( 2022 ) who investigated the effect of touchscreen technologies on young students’ learning. Specifically, from 53 studies, 34 advocated positive effects of touchscreen devices on children’s learning, 17 obtained mixed findings and two studies reported negative effects.

More recently, approaches that refer to the impact of gamification with the use of digital technologies on teaching and learning were also explored. A review by Pan et al. ( 2022 ) that examined the role of learning games in fostering mathematics education in K-12 settings, reported that gameplay improved students’ performance. Integration of digital games in teaching was also found as a promising pedagogical practice in STEM education that could lead to increased learning gains (Martinez et al., 2022 ; Wang et al., 2022 ). However, although Talan et al. ( 2020 ) reported a medium effect of the use of educational games (both digital and non-digital) on academic achievement, the effect of non-digital games was higher.

Over the last two years, the effects of more advanced technologies on teaching and learning were also investigated. Garzón and Acevedo ( 2019 ) found that AR applications had a medium effect on students' learning outcomes compared to traditional lectures. Similarly, Garzón et al. ( 2020 ) showed that AR had a medium impact on students' learning gains. VR applications integrated into various subjects were also found to have a moderate effect on students’ learning compared to control conditions (traditional classes, e.g., lectures, textbooks, and multimedia use, e.g., images, videos, animation, CAI) (Chen et al., 2022b ). Villena-Taranilla et al. ( 2022 ) noted the moderate effect of VR technologies on students’ learning when these were applied in STEM disciplines. In the same meta-analysis, Villena-Taranilla et al. ( 2022 ) highlighted the role of immersive VR, since its effect on students’ learning was greater (at a high level) across educational levels (K-6) compared to semi-immersive and non-immersive integrations. In another meta-analysis study, the effect size of the immersive VR was small and significantly differentiated across educational levels (Coban et al., 2022 ). The impact of AI on education was investigated by Su and Yang ( 2022 ) and Su et al. ( 2022 ), who showed that this technology significantly improved students’ understanding of AI computer science and machine learning concepts.

It is worth noting that the vast majority of studies referred to learning gains in specific subjects. Specifically, several studies examined the impact of digital technologies on students’ literacy skills and reported positive effects on language learning (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Grgurović et al., 2013 ; Friedel et al., 2013 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ; Chen et al., 2022b ; Savva et al., 2022 ). Also, several studies documented positive effects on specific language learning areas, namely foreign language learning (Kao, 2014 ), writing (Higgins et al., 2012 ; Wen & Walters, 2022 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ), as well as reading and comprehension (Cheung & Slavin, 2011 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Schwabe et al., 2022 ). ICTs were also found to have a positive impact on students' performance in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) disciplines (Arztmann et al., 2022 ; Bado, 2022 ; Villena-Taranilla et al., 2022 ; Wang et al., 2022 ). Specifically, a number of studies reported positive impacts on students’ achievement in mathematics (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Hillmayr et al., 2020 ; Li & Ma, 2010 ; Pan et al., 2022 ; Ran et al., 2022 ; Verschaffel et al., 2019 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ). Furthermore, studies documented positive effects of ICTs on science learning (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ; Hillmayr et al., 2020 ; Kalemkuş & Kalemkuş, 2022 ; Lei et al., 2022a ). Çelik ( 2022 ) also noted that computer simulations can help students understand learning concepts related to science. Furthermore, some studies documented that the use of ICTs had a positive impact on students’ achievement in other subjects, such as geography, history, music, and arts (Chauhan, 2017 ; Condie & Munro, 2007 ), and design and technology (Balanskat et al., 2006 ).

More specific positive learning gains were reported in a number of skills, e.g., problem-solving skills and pattern exploration skills (Higgins et al., 2012 ), metacognitive learning outcomes (Verschaffel et al., 2019 ), literacy skills, computational thinking skills, emotion control skills, and collaborative inquiry skills (Lu et al., 2022 ; Su & Yang, 2022 ; Su et al., 2022 ). Additionally, several investigations have reported benefits from the use of ICT on students’ creativity (Fielding & Murcia, 2022 ; Liu et al., 2022 ; Quah & Ng, 2022 ). Lastly, digital technologies were also found to be beneficial for enhancing students’ lifelong learning skills (Haleem et al., 2022 ).

Apart from gaining knowledge and skills, studies also reported improvement in motivation and interest in mathematics (Higgins et. al., 2019 ; Fadda et al., 2022 ) and increased positive achievement emotions towards several subjects during interventions using educational games (Lei et al., 2022a ). Chen et al. ( 2022a ) also reported a small but positive effect of digital health approaches in bullying and cyberbullying interventions with K-12 students, demonstrating that technology-based approaches can help reduce bullying and related consequences by providing emotional support, empowerment, and change of attitude. In their meta-review study, Su et al. ( 2022 ) also documented that AI technologies effectively strengthened students’ attitudes towards learning. In another meta-analysis, Arztmann et al. ( 2022 ) reported positive effects of digital games on motivation and behaviour towards STEM subjects.

Impacts of digital technologies on equality, inclusion and social integration

Although most of the reviewed studies focused on the impact of ICTs on students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes, reports were also made on other aspects in the school context, such as equality, inclusion, and social integration. Condie and Munro ( 2007 ) documented research interventions investigating how ICT can support pupils with additional or special educational needs. While those interventions were relatively small scale and mostly based on qualitative data, their findings indicated that the use of ICTs enabled the development of communication, participation, and self-esteem. A recent meta-analysis (Baragash et al., 2022 ) with 119 participants with different disabilities, reported a significant overall effect size of AR on their functional skills acquisition. Koh’s meta-analysis ( 2022 ) also revealed that students with intellectual and developmental disabilities improved their competence and performance when they used digital games in the lessons.

Istenic Starcic and Bagon ( 2014 ) found that the role of ICT in inclusion and the design of pedagogical and technological interventions was not sufficiently explored in educational interventions with people with special needs; however, some benefits of ICT use were found in students’ social integration. The issue of gender and technology use was mentioned in a small number of studies. Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) reported a statistically significant positive interaction between one-to-one laptop programs and gender. Specifically, the results showed that girls and boys alike benefitted from the laptop program, but the effect on girls’ achievement was smaller than that on boys’. Along the same lines, Arztmann et al. ( 2022 ) reported no difference in the impact of game-based learning between boys and girls, arguing that boys and girls equally benefited from game-based interventions in STEM domains. However, results from a systematic review by Cussó-Calabuig et al. ( 2018 ) found limited and low-quality evidence on the effects of intensive use of computers on gender differences in computer anxiety, self-efficacy, and self-confidence. Based on their view, intensive use of computers can reduce gender differences in some areas and not in others, depending on contextual and implementation factors.

Impacts of digital technologies on teachers’ professional and teaching practices

Various research studies have explored the impact of ICT on teachers’ instructional practices and student assessment. Friedel et al. ( 2013 ) found that the use of mobile devices by students enabled teachers to successfully deliver content (e.g., mobile serious games), provide scaffolding, and facilitate synchronous collaborative learning. The integration of digital games in teaching and learning activities also gave teachers the opportunity to study and apply various pedagogical practices (Bado, 2022 ). Specifically, Bado ( 2022 ) found that teachers who implemented instructional activities in three stages (pre-game, game, and post-game) maximized students’ learning outcomes and engagement. For instance, during the pre-game stage, teachers focused on lectures and gameplay training, at the game stage teachers provided scaffolding on content, addressed technical issues, and managed the classroom activities. During the post-game stage, teachers organized activities for debriefing to ensure that the gameplay had indeed enhanced students’ learning outcomes.

Furthermore, ICT can increase efficiency in lesson planning and preparation by offering possibilities for a more collaborative approach among teachers. The sharing of curriculum plans and the analysis of students’ data led to clearer target settings and improvements in reporting to parents (Balanskat et al., 2006 ).

Additionally, the use and application of digital technologies in teaching and learning were found to enhance teachers’ digital competence. Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ) documented studies that revealed that the use of digital technologies in education had a positive effect on teachers’ basic ICT skills. The greatest impact was found on teachers with enough experience in integrating ICTs in their teaching and/or who had recently participated in development courses for the pedagogical use of technologies in teaching. Punie et al. ( 2006 ) reported that the provision of fully equipped multimedia portable computers and the development of online teacher communities had positive impacts on teachers’ confidence and competence in the use of ICTs.

Moreover, online assessment via ICTs benefits instruction. In particular, online assessments support the digitalization of students’ work and related logistics, allow teachers to gather immediate feedback and readjust to new objectives, and support the improvement of the technical quality of tests by providing more accurate results. Additionally, the capabilities of ICTs (e.g., interactive media, simulations) create new potential methods of testing specific skills, such as problem-solving and problem-processing skills, meta-cognitive skills, creativity and communication skills, and the ability to work productively in groups (Punie et al., 2006 ).

Impacts of digital technologies on other school-related aspects and stakeholders

There is evidence that the effective use of ICTs and the data transmission offered by broadband connections help improve administration (Balanskat et al., 2006 ). Specifically, ICTs have been found to provide better management systems to schools that have data gathering procedures in place. Condie and Munro ( 2007 ) reported impacts from the use of ICTs in schools in the following areas: attendance monitoring, assessment records, reporting to parents, financial management, creation of repositories for learning resources, and sharing of information amongst staff. Such data can be used strategically for self-evaluation and monitoring purposes which in turn can result in school improvements. Additionally, they reported that online access to other people with similar roles helped to reduce headteachers’ isolation by offering them opportunities to share insights into the use of ICT in learning and teaching and how it could be used to support school improvement. Furthermore, ICTs provided more efficient and successful examination management procedures, namely less time-consuming reporting processes compared to paper-based examinations and smooth communications between schools and examination authorities through electronic data exchange (Punie et al., 2006 ).

Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) reported that the use of ICTs improved home-school relationships. Additionally, Escueta et al. ( 2017 ) reported several ICT programs that had improved the flow of information from the school to parents. Particularly, they documented that the use of ICTs (learning management systems, emails, dedicated websites, mobile phones) allowed for personalized and customized information exchange between schools and parents, such as attendance records, upcoming class assignments, school events, and students’ grades, which generated positive results on students’ learning outcomes and attainment. Such information exchange between schools and families prompted parents to encourage their children to put more effort into their schoolwork.

The above findings suggest that the impact of ICT integration in schools goes beyond students’ performance in school subjects. Specifically, it affects a number of school-related aspects, such as equality and social integration, professional and teaching practices, and diverse stakeholders. In Table ​ Table2, 2 , we summarize the different impacts of digital technologies on school stakeholders based on the literature review, while in Table ​ Table3 3 we organized the tools/platforms and practices/policies addressed in the meta-analyses, literature reviews, EU reports, and international bodies included in the manuscript.

The impact of digital technologies on schools’ stakeholders based on the literature review

Tools/platforms and practices/policies addressed in the meta-analyses, literature reviews, EU reports, and international bodies included in the manuscript

Additionally, based on the results of the literature review, there are many types of digital technologies with different affordances (see, for example, studies on VR vs Immersive VR), which evolve over time (e.g. starting from CAIs in 2005 to Augmented and Virtual reality 2020). Furthermore, these technologies are linked to different pedagogies and policy initiatives, which are critical factors in the study of impact. Table ​ Table3 3 summarizes the different tools and practices that have been used to examine the impact of digital technologies on education since 2005 based on the review results.

Factors that affect the integration of digital technologies

Although the analysis of the literature review demonstrated different impacts of the use of digital technology on education, several authors highlighted the importance of various factors, besides the technology itself, that affect this impact. For example, Liao et al. ( 2007 ) suggested that future studies should carefully investigate which factors contribute to positive outcomes by clarifying the exact relationship between computer applications and learning. Additionally, Haßler et al., ( 2016 ) suggested that the neutral findings regarding the impact of tablets on students learning outcomes in some of the studies included in their review should encourage educators, school leaders, and school officials to further investigate the potential of such devices in teaching and learning. Several other researchers suggested that a number of variables play a significant role in the impact of ICTs on students’ learning that could be attributed to the school context, teaching practices and professional development, the curriculum, and learners’ characteristics (Underwood, 2009 ; Tamim et al., 2011 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ; Archer et al., 2014 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Haßler et al., 2016 ; Chauhan, 2017 ; Lee et al., 2020 ; Tang et al., 2022 ).

Digital competencies

One of the most common challenges reported in studies that utilized digital tools in the classroom was the lack of students’ skills on how to use them. Fu ( 2013 ) found that students’ lack of technical skills is a barrier to the effective use of ICT in the classroom. Tamim et al. ( 2015 ) reported that students faced challenges when using tablets and smart mobile devices, associated with the technical issues or expertise needed for their use and the distracting nature of the devices and highlighted the need for teachers’ professional development. Higgins et al. ( 2012 ) reported that skills training about the use of digital technologies is essential for learners to fully exploit the benefits of instruction.

Delgado et al. ( 2015 ), meanwhile, reported studies that showed a strong positive association between teachers’ computer skills and students’ use of computers. Teachers’ lack of ICT skills and familiarization with technologies can become a constraint to the effective use of technology in the classroom (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Delgado et al., 2015 ).

It is worth noting that the way teachers are introduced to ICTs affects the impact of digital technologies on education. Previous studies have shown that teachers may avoid using digital technologies due to limited digital skills (Balanskat, 2006 ), or they prefer applying “safe” technologies, namely technologies that their own teachers used and with which they are familiar (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). In this regard, the provision of digital skills training and exposure to new digital tools might encourage teachers to apply various technologies in their lessons (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). Apart from digital competence, technical support in the school setting has also been shown to affect teachers’ use of technology in their classrooms (Delgado et al., 2015 ). Ferrari et al. ( 2011 ) found that while teachers’ use of ICT is high, 75% stated that they needed more institutional support and a shift in the mindset of educational actors to achieve more innovative teaching practices. The provision of support can reduce time and effort as well as cognitive constraints, which could cause limited ICT integration in the school lessons by teachers (Escueta et al., 2017 ).

Teachers’ personal characteristics, training approaches, and professional development

Teachers’ personal characteristics and professional development affect the impact of digital technologies on education. Specifically, Cheok and Wong ( 2015 ) found that teachers’ personal characteristics (e.g., anxiety, self-efficacy) are associated with their satisfaction and engagement with technology. Bingimlas ( 2009 ) reported that lack of confidence, resistance to change, and negative attitudes in using new technologies in teaching are significant determinants of teachers’ levels of engagement in ICT. The same author reported that the provision of technical support, motivation support (e.g., awards, sufficient time for planning), and training on how technologies can benefit teaching and learning can eliminate the above barriers to ICT integration. Archer et al. ( 2014 ) found that comfort levels in using technology are an important predictor of technology integration and argued that it is essential to provide teachers with appropriate training and ongoing support until they are comfortable with using ICTs in the classroom. Hillmayr et al. ( 2020 ) documented that training teachers on ICT had an important effecton students’ learning.

According to Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ), the impact of ICTs on students’ learning is highly dependent on the teachers’ capacity to efficiently exploit their application for pedagogical purposes. Results obtained from the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) (OECD, 2021 ) revealed that although schools are open to innovative practices and have the capacity to adopt them, only 39% of teachers in the European Union reported that they are well or very well prepared to use digital technologies for teaching. Li and Ma ( 2010 ) and Hardman ( 2019 ) showed that the positive effect of technology on students’ achievement depends on the pedagogical practices used by teachers. Schmid et al. ( 2014 ) reported that learning was best supported when students were engaged in active, meaningful activities with the use of technological tools that provided cognitive support. Tamim et al. ( 2015 ) compared two different pedagogical uses of tablets and found a significant moderate effect when the devices were used in a student-centered context and approach rather than within teacher-led environments. Similarly, Garzón and Acevedo ( 2019 ) and Garzón et al. ( 2020 ) reported that the positive results from the integration of AR applications could be attributed to the existence of different variables which could influence AR interventions (e.g., pedagogical approach, learning environment, and duration of the intervention). Additionally, Garzón et al. ( 2020 ) suggested that the pedagogical resources that teachers used to complement their lectures and the pedagogical approaches they applied were crucial to the effective integration of AR on students’ learning gains. Garzón and Acevedo ( 2019 ) also emphasized that the success of a technology-enhanced intervention is based on both the technology per se and its characteristics and on the pedagogical strategies teachers choose to implement. For instance, their results indicated that the collaborative learning approach had the highest impact on students’ learning gains among other approaches (e.g., inquiry-based learning, situated learning, or project-based learning). Ran et al. ( 2022 ) also found that the use of technology to design collaborative and communicative environments showed the largest moderator effects among the other approaches.

Hattie ( 2008 ) reported that the effective use of computers is associated with training teachers in using computers as a teaching and learning tool. Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) noted that in addition to the strategies teachers adopt in teaching, ongoing professional development is also vital in ensuring the success of technology implementation programs. Sung et al. ( 2016 ) found that research on the use of mobile devices to support learning tends to report that the insufficient preparation of teachers is a major obstacle in implementing effective mobile learning programs in schools. Friedel et al. ( 2013 ) found that providing training and support to teachers increased the positive impact of the interventions on students’ learning gains. Trucano ( 2005 ) argued that positive impacts occur when digital technologies are used to enhance teachers’ existing pedagogical philosophies. Higgins et al. ( 2012 ) found that the types of technologies used and how they are used could also affect students’ learning. The authors suggested that training and professional development of teachers that focuses on the effective pedagogical use of technology to support teaching and learning is an important component of successful instructional approaches (Higgins et al., 2012 ). Archer et al. ( 2014 ) found that studies that reported ICT interventions during which teachers received training and support had moderate positive effects on students’ learning outcomes, which were significantly higher than studies where little or no detail about training and support was mentioned. Fu ( 2013 ) reported that the lack of teachers’ knowledge and skills on the technical and instructional aspects of ICT use in the classroom, in-service training, pedagogy support, technical and financial support, as well as the lack of teachers’ motivation and encouragement to integrate ICT on their teaching were significant barriers to the integration of ICT in education.

School leadership and management

Management and leadership are important cornerstones in the digital transformation process (Pihir et al., 2018 ). Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) documented leadership among the factors positively affecting the successful implementation of technology integration in schools. Strong leadership, strategic planning, and systematic integration of digital technologies are prerequisites for the digital transformation of education systems (Ređep, 2021 ). Management and leadership play a significant role in formulating policies that are translated into practice and ensure that developments in ICT become embedded into the life of the school and in the experiences of staff and pupils (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). Policy support and leadership must include the provision of an overall vision for the use of digital technologies in education, guidance for students and parents, logistical support, as well as teacher training (Conrads et al., 2017 ). Unless there is a commitment throughout the school, with accountability for progress at key points, it is unlikely for ICT integration to be sustained or become part of the culture (Condie & Munro, 2007 ). To achieve this, principals need to adopt and promote a whole-institution strategy and build a strong mutual support system that enables the school’s technological maturity (European Commission, 2019 ). In this context, school culture plays an essential role in shaping the mindsets and beliefs of school actors towards successful technology integration. Condie and Munro ( 2007 ) emphasized the importance of the principal’s enthusiasm and work as a source of inspiration for the school staff and the students to cultivate a culture of innovation and establish sustainable digital change. Specifically, school leaders need to create conditions in which the school staff is empowered to experiment and take risks with technology (Elkordy & Lovinelli, 2020 ).

In order for leaders to achieve the above, it is important to develop capacities for learning and leading, advocating professional learning, and creating support systems and structures (European Commission, 2019 ). Digital technology integration in education systems can be challenging and leadership needs guidance to achieve it. Such guidance can be introduced through the adoption of new methods and techniques in strategic planning for the integration of digital technologies (Ređep, 2021 ). Even though the role of leaders is vital, the relevant training offered to them has so far been inadequate. Specifically, only a third of the education systems in Europe have put in place national strategies that explicitly refer to the training of school principals (European Commission, 2019 , p. 16).

Connectivity, infrastructure, and government and other support

The effective integration of digital technologies across levels of education presupposes the development of infrastructure, the provision of digital content, and the selection of proper resources (Voogt et al., 2013 ). Particularly, a high-quality broadband connection in the school increases the quality and quantity of educational activities. There is evidence that ICT increases and formalizes cooperative planning between teachers and cooperation with managers, which in turn has a positive impact on teaching practices (Balanskat et al., 2006 ). Additionally, ICT resources, including software and hardware, increase the likelihood of teachers integrating technology into the curriculum to enhance their teaching practices (Delgado et al., 2015 ). For example, Zheng et al. ( 2016 ) found that the use of one-on-one laptop programs resulted in positive changes in teaching and learning, which would not have been accomplished without the infrastructure and technical support provided to teachers. Delgado et al. ( 2015 ) reported that limited access to technology (insufficient computers, peripherals, and software) and lack of technical support are important barriers to ICT integration. Access to infrastructure refers not only to the availability of technology in a school but also to the provision of a proper amount and the right types of technology in locations where teachers and students can use them. Effective technical support is a central element of the whole-school strategy for ICT (Underwood, 2009 ). Bingimlas ( 2009 ) reported that lack of technical support in the classroom and whole-school resources (e.g., failing to connect to the Internet, printers not printing, malfunctioning computers, and working on old computers) are significant barriers that discourage the use of ICT by teachers. Moreover, poor quality and inadequate hardware maintenance, and unsuitable educational software may discourage teachers from using ICTs (Balanskat et al., 2006 ; Bingimlas, 2009 ).

Government support can also impact the integration of ICTs in teaching. Specifically, Balanskat et al. ( 2006 ) reported that government interventions and training programs increased teachers’ enthusiasm and positive attitudes towards ICT and led to the routine use of embedded ICT.

Lastly, another important factor affecting digital transformation is the development and quality assurance of digital learning resources. Such resources can be support textbooks and related materials or resources that focus on specific subjects or parts of the curriculum. Policies on the provision of digital learning resources are essential for schools and can be achieved through various actions. For example, some countries are financing web portals that become repositories, enabling teachers to share resources or create their own. Additionally, they may offer e-learning opportunities or other services linked to digital education. In other cases, specific agencies of projects have also been set up to develop digital resources (Eurydice, 2019 ).

Administration and digital data management

The digital transformation of schools involves organizational improvements at the level of internal workflows, communication between the different stakeholders, and potential for collaboration. Vuorikari et al. ( 2020 ) presented evidence that digital technologies supported the automation of administrative practices in schools and reduced the administration’s workload. There is evidence that digital data affects the production of knowledge about schools and has the power to transform how schooling takes place. Specifically, Sellar ( 2015 ) reported that data infrastructure in education is developing due to the demand for “ information about student outcomes, teacher quality, school performance, and adult skills, associated with policy efforts to increase human capital and productivity practices ” (p. 771). In this regard, practices, such as datafication which refers to the “ translation of information about all kinds of things and processes into quantified formats” have become essential for decision-making based on accountability reports about the school’s quality. The data could be turned into deep insights about education or training incorporating ICTs. For example, measuring students’ online engagement with the learning material and drawing meaningful conclusions can allow teachers to improve their educational interventions (Vuorikari et al., 2020 ).

Students’ socioeconomic background and family support

Research show that the active engagement of parents in the school and their support for the school’s work can make a difference to their children’s attitudes towards learning and, as a result, their achievement (Hattie, 2008 ). In recent years, digital technologies have been used for more effective communication between school and family (Escueta et al., 2017 ). The European Commission ( 2020 ) presented data from a Eurostat survey regarding the use of computers by students during the pandemic. The data showed that younger pupils needed additional support and guidance from parents and the challenges were greater for families in which parents had lower levels of education and little to no digital skills.

In this regard, the socio-economic background of the learners and their socio-cultural environment also affect educational achievements (Punie et al., 2006 ). Trucano documented that the use of computers at home positively influenced students’ confidence and resulted in more frequent use at school, compared to students who had no home access (Trucano, 2005 ). In this sense, the socio-economic background affects the access to computers at home (OECD, 2015 ) which in turn influences the experience of ICT, an important factor for school achievement (Punie et al., 2006 ; Underwood, 2009 ). Furthermore, parents from different socio-economic backgrounds may have different abilities and availability to support their children in their learning process (Di Pietro et al., 2020 ).

Schools’ socioeconomic context and emergency situations

The socio-economic context of the school is closely related to a school’s digital transformation. For example, schools in disadvantaged, rural, or deprived areas are likely to lack the digital capacity and infrastructure required to adapt to the use of digital technologies during emergency periods, such as the COVID-19 pandemic (Di Pietro et al., 2020 ). Data collected from school principals confirmed that in several countries, there is a rural/urban divide in connectivity (OECD, 2015 ).

Emergency periods also affect the digitalization of schools. The COVID-19 pandemic led to the closure of schools and forced them to seek appropriate and connective ways to keep working on the curriculum (Di Pietro et al., 2020 ). The sudden large-scale shift to distance and online teaching and learning also presented challenges around quality and equity in education, such as the risk of increased inequalities in learning, digital, and social, as well as teachers facing difficulties coping with this demanding situation (European Commission, 2020 ).

Looking at the findings of the above studies, we can conclude that the impact of digital technologies on education is influenced by various actors and touches many aspects of the school ecosystem. Figure  1 summarizes the factors affecting the digital technologies’ impact on school stakeholders based on the findings from the literature review.

Factors that affect the impact of ICTs on education

The findings revealed that the use of digital technologies in education affects a variety of actors within a school’s ecosystem. First, we observed that as technologies evolve, so does the interest of the research community to apply them to school settings. Figure  2 summarizes the trends identified in current research around the impact of digital technologies on schools’ digital capacity and transformation as found in the present study. Starting as early as 2005, when computers, simulations, and interactive boards were the most commonly applied tools in school interventions (e.g., Eng, 2005 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Moran et al., 2008 ; Tamim et al., 2011 ), moving towards the use of learning platforms (Jewitt et al., 2011 ), then to the use of mobile devices and digital games (e.g., Tamim et al., 2015 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Talan et al., 2020 ), as well as e-books (e.g., Savva et al., 2022 ), to the more recent advanced technologies, such as AR and VR applications (e.g., Garzón & Acevedo, 2019 ; Garzón et al., 2020 ; Kalemkuş & Kalemkuş, 2022 ), or robotics and AI (e.g., Su & Yang, 2022 ; Su et al., 2022 ). As this evolution shows, digital technologies are a concept in flux with different affordances and characteristics. Additionally, from an instructional perspective, there has been a growing interest in different modes and models of content delivery such as online, blended, and hybrid modes (e.g., Cheok & Wong, 2015 ; Kazu & Yalçin, 2022 ; Ulum, 2022 ). This is an indication that the value of technologies to support teaching and learning as well as other school-related practices is increasingly recognized by the research and school community. The impact results from the literature review indicate that ICT integration on students’ learning outcomes has effects that are small (Coban et al., 2022 ; Eng, 2005 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ; Schmid et al., 2014 ; Tamim et al., 2015 ; Zheng et al., 2016 ) to moderate (Garzón & Acevedo, 2019 ; Garzón et al., 2020 ; Liao et al., 2007 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Talan et al., 2020 ; Wen & Walters, 2022 ). That said, a number of recent studies have reported high effect sizes (e.g., Kazu & Yalçin, 2022 ).

Current work and trends in the study of the impact of digital technologies on schools’ digital capacity

Based on these findings, several authors have suggested that the impact of technology on education depends on several variables and not on the technology per se (Tamim et al., 2011 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ; Archer et al., 2014 ; Sung et al., 2016 ; Haßler et al., 2016 ; Chauhan, 2017 ; Lee et al., 2020 ; Lei et al., 2022a ). While the impact of ICTs on student achievement has been thoroughly investigated by researchers, other aspects related to school life that are also affected by ICTs, such as equality, inclusion, and social integration have received less attention. Further analysis of the literature review has revealed a greater investment in ICT interventions to support learning and teaching in the core subjects of literacy and STEM disciplines, especially mathematics, and science. These were the most common subjects studied in the reviewed papers often drawing on national testing results, while studies that investigated other subject areas, such as social studies, were limited (Chauhan, 2017 ; Condie & Munro, 2007 ). As such, research is still lacking impact studies that focus on the effects of ICTs on a range of curriculum subjects.

The qualitative research provided additional information about the impact of digital technologies on education, documenting positive effects and giving more details about implications, recommendations, and future research directions. Specifically, the findings regarding the role of ICTs in supporting learning highlight the importance of teachers’ instructional practice and the learning context in the use of technologies and consequently their impact on instruction (Çelik, 2022 ; Schmid et al., 2014 ; Tamim et al., 2015 ). The review also provided useful insights regarding the various factors that affect the impact of digital technologies on education. These factors are interconnected and play a vital role in the transformation process. Specifically, these factors include a) digital competencies; b) teachers’ personal characteristics and professional development; c) school leadership and management; d) connectivity, infrastructure, and government support; e) administration and data management practices; f) students’ socio-economic background and family support and g) the socioeconomic context of the school and emergency situations. It is worth noting that we observed factors that affect the integration of ICTs in education but may also be affected by it. For example, the frequent use of ICTs and the use of laptops by students for instructional purposes positively affect the development of digital competencies (Zheng et al., 2016 ) and at the same time, the digital competencies affect the use of ICTs (Fu, 2013 ; Higgins et al., 2012 ). As a result, the impact of digital technologies should be explored more as an enabler of desirable and new practices and not merely as a catalyst that improves the output of the education process i.e. namely student attainment.

Conclusions

Digital technologies offer immense potential for fundamental improvement in schools. However, investment in ICT infrastructure and professional development to improve school education are yet to provide fruitful results. Digital transformation is a complex process that requires large-scale transformative changes that presuppose digital capacity and preparedness. To achieve such changes, all actors within the school’s ecosystem need to share a common vision regarding the integration of ICTs in education and work towards achieving this goal. Our literature review, which synthesized quantitative and qualitative data from a list of meta-analyses and review studies, provided useful insights into the impact of ICTs on different school stakeholders and showed that the impact of digital technologies touches upon many different aspects of school life, which are often overlooked when the focus is on student achievement as the final output of education. Furthermore, the concept of digital technologies is a concept in flux as technologies are not only different among them calling for different uses in the educational practice but they also change through time. Additionally, we opened a forum for discussion regarding the factors that affect a school’s digital capacity and transformation. We hope that our study will inform policy, practice, and research and result in a paradigm shift towards more holistic approaches in impact and assessment studies.

Study limitations and future directions

We presented a review of the study of digital technologies' impact on education and factors influencing schools’ digital capacity and transformation. The study results were based on a non-systematic literature review grounded on the acquisition of documentation in specific databases. Future studies should investigate more databases to corroborate and enhance our results. Moreover, search queries could be enhanced with key terms that could provide additional insights about the integration of ICTs in education, such as “policies and strategies for ICT integration in education”. Also, the study drew information from meta-analyses and literature reviews to acquire evidence about the effects of ICT integration in schools. Such evidence was mostly based on the general conclusions of the studies. It is worth mentioning that, we located individual studies which showed different, such as negative or neutral results. Thus, further insights are needed about the impact of ICTs on education and the factors influencing the impact. Furthermore, the nature of the studies included in meta-analyses and reviews is different as they are based on different research methodologies and data gathering processes. For instance, in a meta-analysis, the impact among the studies investigated is measured in a particular way, depending on policy or research targets (e.g., results from national examinations, pre-/post-tests). Meanwhile, in literature reviews, qualitative studies offer additional insights and detail based on self-reports and research opinions on several different aspects and stakeholders who could affect and be affected by ICT integration. As a result, it was challenging to draw causal relationships between so many interrelating variables.

Despite the challenges mentioned above, this study envisaged examining school units as ecosystems that consist of several actors by bringing together several variables from different research epistemologies to provide an understanding of the integration of ICTs. However, the use of other tools and methodologies and models for evaluation of the impact of digital technologies on education could give more detailed data and more accurate results. For instance, self-reflection tools, like SELFIE—developed on the DigCompOrg framework- (Kampylis et al., 2015 ; Bocconi & Lightfoot, 2021 ) can help capture a school’s digital capacity and better assess the impact of ICTs on education. Furthermore, the development of a theory of change could be a good approach for documenting the impact of digital technologies on education. Specifically, theories of change are models used for the evaluation of interventions and their impact; they are developed to describe how interventions will work and give the desired outcomes (Mayne, 2015 ). Theory of change as a methodological approach has also been used by researchers to develop models for evaluation in the field of education (e.g., Aromatario et al., 2019 ; Chapman & Sammons, 2013 ; De Silva et al., 2014 ).

We also propose that future studies aim at similar investigations by applying more holistic approaches for impact assessment that can provide in-depth data about the impact of digital technologies on education. For instance, future studies could focus on different research questions about the technologies that are used during the interventions or the way the implementation takes place (e.g., What methodologies are used for documenting impact? How are experimental studies implemented? How can teachers be taken into account and trained on the technology and its functions? What are the elements of an appropriate and successful implementation? How is the whole intervention designed? On which learning theories is the technology implementation based?).

Future research could also focus on assessing the impact of digital technologies on various other subjects since there is a scarcity of research related to particular subjects, such as geography, history, arts, music, and design and technology. More research should also be done about the impact of ICTs on skills, emotions, and attitudes, and on equality, inclusion, social interaction, and special needs education. There is also a need for more research about the impact of ICTs on administration, management, digitalization, and home-school relationships. Additionally, although new forms of teaching and learning with the use of ICTs (e.g., blended, hybrid, and online learning) have initiated several investigations in mainstream classrooms, only a few studies have measured their impact on students’ learning. Additionally, our review did not document any study about the impact of flipped classrooms on K-12 education. Regarding teaching and learning approaches, it is worth noting that studies referred to STEM or STEAM did not investigate the impact of STEM/STEAM as an interdisciplinary approach to learning but only investigated the impact of ICTs on learning in each domain as a separate subject (science, technology, engineering, arts, mathematics). Hence, we propose future research to also investigate the impact of the STEM/STEAM approach on education. The impact of emerging technologies on education, such as AR, VR, robotics, and AI has also been investigated recently, but more work needs to be done.

Finally, we propose that future studies could focus on the way in which specific factors, e.g., infrastructure and government support, school leadership and management, students’ and teachers’ digital competencies, approaches teachers utilize in the teaching and learning (e.g., blended, online and hybrid learning, flipped classrooms, STEM/STEAM approach, project-based learning, inquiry-based learning), affect the impact of digital technologies on education. We hope that future studies will give detailed insights into the concept of schools’ digital transformation through further investigation of impacts and factors which influence digital capacity and transformation based on the results and the recommendations of the present study.

Acknowledgements

This project has received funding under Grant Agreement No Ref Ares (2021) 339036 7483039 as well as funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program under Grant Agreement No 739578 and the Government of the Republic of Cyprus through the Deputy Ministry of Research, Innovation and Digital Policy. The UVa co-authors would like also to acknowledge funding from the European Regional Development Fund and the National Research Agency of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, under project grant PID2020-112584RB-C32.

Data availability statement

Declarations.

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• Archer K, Savage R, Sanghera-Sidhu S, Wood E, Gottardo A, Chen V. Examining the effectiveness of technology use in classrooms: A tertiary meta-analysis. Computers & Education. 2014; 78 :140–149. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aromatario O, Van Hoye A, Vuillemin A, Foucaut AM, Pommier J, Cambon L. Using theory of change to develop an intervention theory for designing and evaluating behavior change SDApps for healthy eating and physical exercise: The OCAPREV theory. BMC Public Health. 2019; 19 (1):1–12. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-7828-4. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Arztmann, M., Hornstra, L., Jeuring, J., & Kester, L. (2022). Effects of games in STEM education: A meta-analysis on the moderating role of student background characteristics. Studies in Science Education , 1-37. 10.1080/03057267.2022.2057732
• Bado N. Game-based learning pedagogy: A review of the literature. Interactive Learning Environments. 2022; 30 (5):936–948. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2019.1683587. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Balanskat, A. (2009). Study of the impact of technology in primary schools – Synthesis Report. Empirica and European Schoolnet. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://erte.dge.mec.pt/sites/default/files/Recursos/Estudos/synthesis_report_steps_en.pdf
• Balanskat, A. (2006). The ICT Impact Report: A review of studies of ICT impact on schools in Europe, European Schoolnet. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from:  https://en.unesco.org/icted/content/ict-impact-report-review-studies-ict-impact-schools-europe
• Balanskat, A., Blamire, R., & Kefala, S. (2006). The ICT impact report.  European Schoolnet . Retrieved from: http://colccti.colfinder.org/sites/default/files/ict_impact_report_0.pdf
• Balyer, A., & Öz, Ö. (2018). Academicians’ views on digital transformation in education. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 5 (4), 809–830. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  http://iojet.org/index.php/IOJET/article/view/441/295
• Baragash RS, Al-Samarraie H, Moody L, Zaqout F. Augmented reality and functional skills acquisition among individuals with special needs: A meta-analysis of group design studies. Journal of Special Education Technology. 2022; 37 (1):74–81. doi: 10.1177/0162643420910413. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning . Open Educational Resources Collection . 6. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://irl.umsl.edu/oer/6
• Bingimlas KA. Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. 2009; 5 (3):235–245. doi: 10.12973/ejmste/75275. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blaskó Z, Costa PD, Schnepf SV. Learning losses and educational inequalities in Europe: Mapping the potential consequences of the COVID-19 crisis. Journal of European Social Policy. 2022; 32 (4):361–375. doi: 10.1177/09589287221091687. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bocconi S, Lightfoot M. Scaling up and integrating the selfie tool for schools' digital capacity in education and training systems: Methodology and lessons learnt. European Training Foundation. 2021 doi: 10.2816/907029,JRC123936. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brooks, D. C., & McCormack, M. (2020). Driving Digital Transformation in Higher Education . Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://library.educause.edu/-/media/files/library/2020/6/dx2020.pdf?la=en&hash=28FB8C377B59AFB1855C225BBA8E3CFBB0A271DA
• Cachia, R., Chaudron, S., Di Gioia, R., Velicu, A., & Vuorikari, R. (2021). Emergency remote schooling during COVID-19, a closer look at European families. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC125787
• Çelik B. The effects of computer simulations on students’ science process skills: Literature review. Canadian Journal of Educational and Social Studies. 2022; 2 (1):16–28. doi: 10.53103/cjess.v2i1.17. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chapman, C., & Sammons, P. (2013). School Self-Evaluation for School Improvement: What Works and Why? . CfBT Education Trust. 60 Queens Road, Reading, RG1 4BS, England.
• Chauhan S. A meta-analysis of the impact of technology on learning effectiveness of elementary students. Computers & Education. 2017; 105 :14–30. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.11.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen, Q., Chan, K. L., Guo, S., Chen, M., Lo, C. K. M., & Ip, P. (2022a). Effectiveness of digital health interventions in reducing bullying and cyberbullying: a meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse , 15248380221082090. 10.1177/15248380221082090 [ PubMed ]
• Chen B, Wang Y, Wang L. The effects of virtual reality-assisted language learning: A meta-analysis. Sustainability. 2022; 14 (6):3147. doi: 10.3390/su14063147. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheok ML, Wong SL. Predictors of e-learning satisfaction in teaching and learning for school teachers: A literature review. International Journal of Instruction. 2015; 8 (1):75–90. doi: 10.12973/iji.2015.816a. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheung, A. C., & Slavin, R. E. (2011). The Effectiveness of Education Technology for Enhancing Reading Achievement: A Meta-Analysis. Center for Research and reform in Education .
• Coban, M., Bolat, Y. I., & Goksu, I. (2022). The potential of immersive virtual reality to enhance learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review , 100452. 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100452
• Condie, R., & Munro, R. K. (2007). The impact of ICT in schools-a landscape review. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://oei.org.ar/ibertic/evaluacion/sites/default/files/biblioteca/33_impact_ict_in_schools.pdf
• Conrads, J., Rasmussen, M., Winters, N., Geniet, A., Langer, L., (2017). Digital Education Policies in Europe and Beyond: Key Design Principles for More Effective Policies. Redecker, C., P. Kampylis, M. Bacigalupo, Y. Punie (ed.), EUR 29000 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 10.2760/462941
• Costa P, Castaño-Muñoz J, Kampylis P. Capturing schools’ digital capacity: Psychometric analyses of the SELFIE self-reflection tool. Computers & Education. 2021; 162 :104080. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104080. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cussó-Calabuig R, Farran XC, Bosch-Capblanch X. Effects of intensive use of computers in secondary school on gender differences in attitudes towards ICT: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies. 2018; 23 (5):2111–2139. doi: 10.1007/s10639-018-9706-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Daniel SJ. Education and the COVID-19 pandemic. Prospects. 2020; 49 (1):91–96. doi: 10.1007/s11125-020-09464-3. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Delcker J, Ifenthaler D. Teachers’ perspective on school development at German vocational schools during the Covid-19 pandemic. Technology, Pedagogy and Education. 2021; 30 (1):125–139. doi: 10.1080/1475939X.2020.1857826. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Delgado, A., Wardlow, L., O’Malley, K., & McKnight, K. (2015). Educational technology: A review of the integration, resources, and effectiveness of technology in K-12 classrooms. Journal of Information Technology Education Research , 14, 397. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol14/JITEv14ResearchP397-416Delgado1829.pdf
• De Silva MJ, Breuer E, Lee L, Asher L, Chowdhary N, Lund C, Patel V. Theory of change: A theory-driven approach to enhance the Medical Research Council's framework for complex interventions. Trials. 2014; 15 (1):1–13. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-267. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Di Pietro G, Biagi F, Costa P, Karpiński Z, Mazza J. The likely impact of COVID-19 on education: Reflections based on the existing literature and recent international datasets. Publications Office of the European Union; 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Elkordy A, Lovinelli J. Competencies, Culture, and Change: A Model for Digital Transformation in K12 Educational Contexts. In: Ifenthaler D, Hofhues S, Egloffstein M, Helbig C, editors. Digital Transformation of Learning Organizations. Springer; 2020. pp. 203–219. [ Google Scholar ]
• Eng TS. The impact of ICT on learning: A review of research. International Education Journal. 2005; 6 (5):635–650. [ Google Scholar ]
• European Commission. (2020). Digital Education Action Plan 2021 – 2027. Resetting education and training for the digital age. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://ec.europa.eu/education/sites/default/files/document-library-docs/deap-communication-sept2020_en.pdf
• European Commission. (2019). 2 nd survey of schools: ICT in education. Objective 1: Benchmark progress in ICT in schools . Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://data.europa.eu/euodp/data/storage/f/2019-03-19T084831/FinalreportObjective1-BenchmarkprogressinICTinschools.pdf
• Eurydice. (2019). Digital Education at School in Europe , Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/digital-education-school-europe_en
• Escueta, M., Quan, V., Nickow, A. J., & Oreopoulos, P. (2017). Education technology: An evidence-based review. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://ssrn.com/abstract=3031695
• Fadda D, Pellegrini M, Vivanet G, Zandonella Callegher C. Effects of digital games on student motivation in mathematics: A meta-analysis in K-12. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2022; 38 (1):304–325. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12618. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fernández-Gutiérrez M, Gimenez G, Calero J. Is the use of ICT in education leading to higher student outcomes? Analysis from the Spanish Autonomous Communities. Computers & Education. 2020; 157 :103969. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103969. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferrari, A., Cachia, R., & Punie, Y. (2011). Educational change through technology: A challenge for obligatory schooling in Europe. Lecture Notes in Computer Science , 6964 , 97–110. Retrieved 30 June 2022  https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-642-23985-4.pdf
• Fielding, K., & Murcia, K. (2022). Research linking digital technologies to young children’s creativity: An interpretive framework and systematic review. Issues in Educational Research , 32 (1), 105–125. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  http://www.iier.org.au/iier32/fielding-abs.html
• Friedel, H., Bos, B., Lee, K., & Smith, S. (2013). The impact of mobile handheld digital devices on student learning: A literature review with meta-analysis. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3708–3717). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
• Fu JS. ICT in education: A critical literature review and its implications. International Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT) 2013; 9 (1):112–125. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gaol FL, Prasolova-Førland E. Special section editorial: The frontiers of augmented and mixed reality in all levels of education. Education and Information Technologies. 2022; 27 (1):611–623. doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10746-2. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garzón J, Acevedo J. Meta-analysis of the impact of Augmented Reality on students’ learning gains. Educational Research Review. 2019; 27 :244–260. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2019.04.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garzón, J., Baldiris, S., Gutiérrez, J., & Pavón, J. (2020). How do pedagogical approaches affect the impact of augmented reality on education? A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Educational Research Review , 100334. 10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100334
• Grgurović M, Chapelle CA, Shelley MC. A meta-analysis of effectiveness studies on computer technology-supported language learning. ReCALL. 2013; 25 (2):165–198. doi: 10.1017/S0958344013000013. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haßler B, Major L, Hennessy S. Tablet use in schools: A critical review of the evidence for learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2016; 32 (2):139–156. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12123. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haleem A, Javaid M, Qadri MA, Suman R. Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers. 2022; 3 :275–285. doi: 10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hardman J. Towards a pedagogical model of teaching with ICTs for mathematics attainment in primary school: A review of studies 2008–2018. Heliyon. 2019; 5 (5):e01726. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01726. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hattie J, Rogers HJ, Swaminathan H. The role of meta-analysis in educational research. In: Reid AD, Hart P, Peters MA, editors. A companion to research in education. Springer; 2014. pp. 197–207. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hattie J. Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. 2008 doi: 10.4324/9780203887332. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Higgins S, Xiao Z, Katsipataki M. The impact of digital technology on learning: A summary for the education endowment foundation. Education Endowment Foundation and Durham University; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Higgins, K., Huscroft-D’Angelo, J., & Crawford, L. (2019). Effects of technology in mathematics on achievement, motivation, and attitude: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 57(2), 283-319.
• Hillmayr D, Ziernwald L, Reinhold F, Hofer SI, Reiss KM. The potential of digital tools to enhance mathematics and science learning in secondary schools: A context-specific meta-analysis. Computers & Education. 2020; 153 (1038):97. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103897. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Istenic Starcic A, Bagon S. ICT-supported learning for inclusion of people with special needs: Review of seven educational technology journals, 1970–2011. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2014; 45 (2):202–230. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12086. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jewitt C, Clark W, Hadjithoma-Garstka C. The use of learning platforms to organise learning in English primary and secondary schools. Learning, Media and Technology. 2011; 36 (4):335–348. doi: 10.1080/17439884.2011.621955. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• JISC. (2020). What is digital transformation?.  Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/digital-strategy-framework-for-university-leaders/what-is-digital-transformation
• Kalati, A. T., & Kim, M. S. (2022). What is the effect of touchscreen technology on young children’s learning?: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies , 1-19. 10.1007/s10639-021-10816-5
• Kalemkuş, J., & Kalemkuş, F. (2022). Effect of the use of augmented reality applications on academic achievement of student in science education: Meta-analysis review. Interactive Learning Environments , 1-18. 10.1080/10494820.2022.2027458
• Kao C-W. The effects of digital game-based learning task in English as a foreign language contexts: A meta-analysis. Education Journal. 2014; 42 (2):113–141. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kampylis P, Punie Y, Devine J. Promoting effective digital-age learning - a European framework for digitally competent educational organisations. JRC Technical Reports. 2015 doi: 10.2791/54070. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kazu IY, Yalçin CK. Investigation of the effectiveness of hybrid learning on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Progressive Education. 2022; 18 (1):249–265. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2022.426.14. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Koh C. A qualitative meta-analysis on the use of serious games to support learners with intellectual and developmental disabilities: What we know, what we need to know and what we can do. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education. 2022; 69 (3):919–950. doi: 10.1080/1034912X.2020.1746245. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• König J, Jäger-Biela DJ, Glutsch N. Adapting to online teaching during COVID-19 school closure: Teacher education and teacher competence effects among early career teachers in Germany. European Journal of Teacher Education. 2020; 43 (4):608–622. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2020.1809650. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lawrence JE, Tar UA. Factors that influence teachers’ adoption and integration of ICT in teaching/learning process. Educational Media International. 2018; 55 (1):79–105. doi: 10.1080/09523987.2018.1439712. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee, S., Kuo, L. J., Xu, Z., & Hu, X. (2020). The effects of technology-integrated classroom instruction on K-12 English language learners’ literacy development: A meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 1-32. 10.1080/09588221.2020.1774612
• Lei, H., Chiu, M. M., Wang, D., Wang, C., & Xie, T. (2022a). Effects of game-based learning on students’ achievement in science: a meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research . 10.1177/07356331211064543
• Lei H, Wang C, Chiu MM, Chen S. Do educational games affect students' achievement emotions? Evidence from a meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2022; 38 (4):946–959. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12664. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liao YKC, Chang HW, Chen YW. Effects of computer application on elementary school student's achievement: A meta-analysis of students in Taiwan. Computers in the Schools. 2007; 24 (3–4):43–64. doi: 10.1300/J025v24n03_04. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li Q, Ma X. A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review. 2010; 22 (3):215–243. doi: 10.1007/s10648-010-9125-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu, M., Pang, W., Guo, J., & Zhang, Y. (2022). A meta-analysis of the effect of multimedia technology on creative performance. Education and Information Technologies , 1-28. 10.1007/s10639-022-10981-1
• Lu Z, Chiu MM, Cui Y, Mao W, Lei H. Effects of game-based learning on students’ computational thinking: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 2022 doi: 10.1177/07356331221100740. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Martinez L, Gimenes M, Lambert E. Entertainment video games for academic learning: A systematic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 2022 doi: 10.1177/07356331211053848. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mayne J. Useful theory of change models. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. 2015; 30 (2):119–142. doi: 10.3138/cjpe.230. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moran J, Ferdig RE, Pearson PD, Wardrop J, Blomeyer RL., Jr Technology and reading performance in the middle-school grades: A meta-analysis with recommendations for policy and practice. Journal of Literacy Research. 2008; 40 (1):6–58. doi: 10.1080/10862960802070483. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD. (2015). Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection . PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. Retrieved from: 10.1787/9789264239555-en
• OECD. (2021). OECD Digital Education Outlook 2021: Pushing the Frontiers with Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain and Robots. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/oecd-digital-education-outlook-2021_589b283f-en
• Pan Y, Ke F, Xu X. A systematic review of the role of learning games in fostering mathematics education in K-12 settings. Educational Research Review. 2022; 36 :100448. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100448. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pettersson F. Understanding digitalization and educational change in school by means of activity theory and the levels of learning concept. Education and Information Technologies. 2021; 26 (1):187–204. doi: 10.1007/s10639-020-10239-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pihir, I., Tomičić-Pupek, K., & Furjan, M. T. (2018). Digital transformation insights and trends. In Central European Conference on Information and Intelligent Systems (pp. 141–149). Faculty of Organization and Informatics Varazdin. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from https://www.proquest.com/conference-papers-proceedings/digital-transformation-insights-trends/docview/2125639934/se-2
• Punie, Y., Zinnbauer, D., & Cabrera, M. (2006). A review of the impact of ICT on learning. Working Paper prepared for DG EAC. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: http://www.eurosfaire.prd.fr/7pc/doc/1224678677_jrc47246n.pdf
• Quah CY, Ng KH. A systematic literature review on digital storytelling authoring tool in education: January 2010 to January 2020. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. 2022; 38 (9):851–867. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2021.1972608. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ran H, Kim NJ, Secada WG. A meta-analysis on the effects of technology's functions and roles on students' mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms. Journal of computer assisted learning. 2022; 38 (1):258–284. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12611. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ređep, N. B. (2021). Comparative overview of the digital preparedness of education systems in selected CEE countries. Center for Policy Studies. CEU Democracy Institute .
• Rott, B., & Marouane, C. (2018). Digitalization in schools–organization, collaboration and communication. In Digital Marketplaces Unleashed (pp. 113–124). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• Savva M, Higgins S, Beckmann N. Meta-analysis examining the effects of electronic storybooks on language and literacy outcomes for children in grades Pre-K to grade 2. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2022; 38 (2):526–564. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12623. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schmid RF, Bernard RM, Borokhovski E, Tamim RM, Abrami PC, Surkes MA, Wade CA, Woods J. The effects of technology use in postsecondary education: A meta-analysis of classroom applications. Computers & Education. 2014; 72 :271–291. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.11.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schuele CM, Justice LM. The importance of effect sizes in the interpretation of research: Primer on research: Part 3. The ASHA Leader. 2006; 11 (10):14–27. doi: 10.1044/leader.FTR4.11102006.14. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schwabe, A., Lind, F., Kosch, L., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2022). No negative effects of reading on screen on comprehension of narrative texts compared to print: A meta-analysis. Media Psychology , 1-18. 10.1080/15213269.2022.2070216
• Sellar S. Data infrastructure: a review of expanding accountability systems and large-scale assessments in education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education. 2015; 36 (5):765–777. doi: 10.1080/01596306.2014.931117. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stock WA. Systematic coding for research synthesis. In: Cooper H, Hedges LV, editors. The handbook of research synthesis, 236. Russel Sage; 1994. pp. 125–138. [ Google Scholar ]
• Su, J., Zhong, Y., & Ng, D. T. K. (2022). A meta-review of literature on educational approaches for teaching AI at the K-12 levels in the Asia-Pacific region. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence , 100065. 10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100065
• Su J, Yang W. Artificial intelligence in early childhood education: A scoping review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2022; 3 :100049. doi: 10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100049. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sung YT, Chang KE, Liu TC. The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students' learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education. 2016; 94 :252–275. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.008. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Talan T, Doğan Y, Batdı V. Efficiency of digital and non-digital educational games: A comparative meta-analysis and a meta-thematic analysis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 2020; 52 (4):474–514. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2020.1743798. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational research, 81 (1), 4–28. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from 10.3102/0034654310393361
• Tamim, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Pickup, D., Bernard, R. M., & El Saadi, L. (2015). Tablets for teaching and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Commonwealth of Learning. Retrieved from: http://oasis.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/1012/2015_Tamim-et-al_Tablets-for-Teaching-and-Learning.pdf
• Tang C, Mao S, Xing Z, Naumann S. Improving student creativity through digital technology products: A literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2022; 44 :101032. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101032. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tolani-Brown, N., McCormac, M., & Zimmermann, R. (2011). An analysis of the research and impact of ICT in education in developing country contexts. In ICTs and sustainable solutions for the digital divide: Theory and perspectives (pp. 218–242). IGI Global.
• Trucano, M. (2005). Knowledge Maps: ICTs in Education. Washington, DC: info Dev / World Bank. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from  https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED496513.pdf
• Ulum H. The effects of online education on academic success: A meta-analysis study. Education and Information Technologies. 2022; 27 (1):429–450. doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10740-8. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Underwood, J. D. (2009). The impact of digital technology: A review of the evidence of the impact of digital technologies on formal education. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/id/eprint/10491
• Verschaffel, L., Depaepe, F., & Mevarech, Z. (2019). Learning Mathematics in metacognitively oriented ICT-Based learning environments: A systematic review of the literature. Education Research International , 2019 . 10.1155/2019/3402035
• Villena-Taranilla R, Tirado-Olivares S, Cózar-Gutiérrez R, González-Calero JA. Effects of virtual reality on learning outcomes in K-6 education: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review. 2022; 35 :100434. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100434. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Voogt J, Knezek G, Cox M, Knezek D, ten Brummelhuis A. Under which conditions does ICT have a positive effect on teaching and learning? A call to action. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2013; 29 (1):4–14. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00453.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y., & Cabrera, M. (2020). Emerging technologies and the teaching profession: Ethical and pedagogical considerations based on near-future scenarios  (No. JRC120183). Joint Research Centre. Retrieved 30 June 2022 from: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC120183
• Wang LH, Chen B, Hwang GJ, Guan JQ, Wang YQ. Effects of digital game-based STEM education on students’ learning achievement: A meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education. 2022; 9 (1):1–13. doi: 10.1186/s40594-022-00344-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wen X, Walters SM. The impact of technology on students’ writing performances in elementary classrooms: A meta-analysis. Computers and Education Open. 2022; 3 :100082. doi: 10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100082. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zheng B, Warschauer M, Lin CH, Chang C. Learning in one-to-one laptop environments: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Review of Educational Research. 2016; 86 (4):1052–1084. doi: 10.3102/0034654316628645. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Explore how Microsoft's partnership with Khan Academy is enhancing the future of education with AI innovation and tools for teachers >

• AI in education
• Published Feb 5, 2024

Reimagine Education: A digital event on March 6, 2024

• Content Type
• Customer stories

We are excited to invite you to Reimagine Education , a worldwide digital event from Microsoft Education taking place Wednesday, March 6, 2024, at 9:00 AM PT (UTC-8) and 6:00 PM PT (UTC-8).  

During the event, hear stories from innovative schools around the world. Also hear from Microsoft leaders, including President and Vice Chair Brad Smith, and Vice President, Education Paige Johnson, on how we can work together to empower every learner to achieve more.  

Select a time on March 6 and save Reimagine Education to your calendar now! No registration required.  

AI in education brings opportunity to life 

AI is transforming the world of education. Generative AI tools are having an incredible impact on the way we learn, work, and play. At Microsoft, we are committed to making sure AI systems are developed responsibly and that equitable opportunities are created for all students, in the classroom and beyond. Join us to explore insights from global education innovators who will share next practices on education equity, security, and workforce readiness in the era of AI.  

Students, educators, and leaders from schools and universities around the globe are leveraging Microsoft AI solutions to enhance learning outcomes, boost efficiency, and make education organizations more secure, accessible, and inclusive. Hear from leaders at Fulton County Schools (Georgia, U.S.), Oregon State University, Department for Education South Australia, and many other educational institutions, sharing how they’ve embraced AI solutions and laid foundations for ongoing innovation in education. You will also hear a fascinating conversation with Paige Johnson, VP of Education at Microsoft, and Chris Reykdal, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction in Washington. He will share how his agency is leading an initiative to implement AI across K12 schools in Washington State.

Join us to discover how to: 

• Create more equitable and efficient learning environments with Microsoft AI solutions.  
• Build on a secure foundation and improve security operations with industry-leading AI solutions and automated workflows. 
• Prepare students for the ever-evolving future of work. 
• Leverage the latest education technology announcements from Microsoft.  

The event is open to everyone, no registration required. Save the date to your calendar and join us Wednesday, March 6, 2024, at 9:00 AM PT (UTC-8) or 6:00 PM PT (UTC-8).   

aka.ms/ReimagineEducation

I’m excited to have you join me to learn how you can use the latest Microsoft AI tools to create more equitable, safe, and efficient learning environments while helping to prepare students for the ever-evolving future of work.   Paige Johnson, Vice President, Education at Microsoft

Together we can reimagine education.  

Related Posts

Inspiring students during Women’s History Month 2024  

Stay ahead with 8 new updates from Microsoft Education  

Streamline messaging with Dynamics 365 Customer Insights  

Ai in education brings opportunity to life.

Watch Reimagine Education

Connect with us on social

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay up to date with monthly newsletters from Microsoft Education.  

School stories

Get inspired by stories from Microsoft Education customers.

Microsoft Learn Educator Center

Expand possibilities with educator training and professional development resources.

Contact sales

Connect with a Microsoft Education sales specialist to explore solutions for your school.

Discover a collection of resources to support a variety of educational topics.

Unlock SAT® Verbal Prep 2024 4+

New digital sat verbal prep, designed for ipad.

• 5.0 • 4 Ratings

Screenshots

Description.

Discover the path to higher digital SAT® Verbal Scores in 2024. Use Unlocks’s easy-to-follow lessons, adaptive learning, and personalized insights Achieve Your Best digital SAT® Verbal Score with Unlock's SAT Practice App!  Unlock's practice app is your ultimate companion for digital SAT® Verbal Test prep. Our AI-powered Intelligent Learning Engine (ILE®) analyzes your skills at a granular level, adapting to your learning style to target specific areas for improvement. Experience customized preparation, adaptive learning, and personalized insights tailored to your needs.  Join countless students who have achieved remarkable results with Unlock. From substantial score improvements to enhanced confidence, our platform delivers tangible outcomes. Students completing our personalized lessons and adaptive quizzes have seen substantial SAT® score gains, with many increasing by over 200 points.  SAT® Verbal prep Coverage:  - Reading and Writing: Vocabulary, Punctuation, Textual Analysis (including Main Idea, Evidence, Transitions), and more.     Key Features:  - Adaptive Learning provides targeted recommendations for maximum score gains.  - Personalized Learning Path with diagnostic and practice questions.  - Progress Tracking monitors improvements and achievements over time - Easy-to-Follow Lessons: Introduction, Recognition Quiz, Strategy Videos, and Practice Quiz.  - AI-powered Intelligent Learning Engine (ILE®) - User-friendly interface! Ideal for busy students on the go.  - Comprehensive coverage of Digital SAT® Verbal section.  - Digital SAT® Math coverage on its way.    Prepare for success and start your SAT® journey with Unlock. Download now for free!  About Us We are a company of educators and data scientists, meaning we use data insights to build strategies that work – on test day, under pressure. These strategies have been used by thousands of students over the past ten years in private tutoring and in public schools. We built this app based on feedback from students like you. Here is what they have to say: "I did practice problems on Khan every day for a full year. I was surprised my scores didn’t move. I wish I had used Unlock earlier." - Cara "I am top of my class but I struggle with tests. Unlock’s tailored program gave me confidence on the SAT. I got into Yale – my dream school!" - Katie "Our four children have worked with Unlock, and we are thrilled with the results. Each received high quality, customized instruction – each of our children had different areas of need. Each got into their first choice. We are forever grateful!" - Andrew (parent)

Ratings and Reviews

App privacy.

The developer, unlock edu , indicated that the app’s privacy practices may include handling of data as described below. For more information, see the developer’s privacy policy .

Data Not Linked to You

The following data may be collected but it is not linked to your identity:

• Contact Info
• Identifiers

Privacy practices may vary, for example, based on the features you use or your age. Learn More

Information

• App Support
• Privacy Policy

You Might Also Like

Migii - Digital SAT® prep

Preptly: Digital SAT® Prep

Papa Cambridge - CAIE & More

Phonics Island Letter sounds

AI Note Taker - Coconote

SAT Prep & Practice by Magoosh

Advertisement

Higher education strategy in digital transformation

• Published: 14 September 2021
• Volume 27 , pages 3171–3195, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

• Mohamed Ashmel Mohamed Hashim 1 ,
• Issam Tlemsani 2 &
• Robin Matthews 3 , 4 , 5  

46k Accesses

78 Citations

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

A Correction to this article was published on 03 February 2022

This article has been updated

Digital transformation in the global higher education industry determines the future roadmap to a sustainable education management strategy. This research paper aims to develop a qualitative model that advocates how digital transformation as a propelling force could be used to build competitive advantages for universities. Building competitive advantage is a relative, evolving, and important concept in strategy formulation. In recent years, specifically in the education industry, the notion of building competitive advantage is challenged by global phenomena such as digital transformation globalization, information exchange, digitization and social media in most of the global industries. These phenomena have collectively made the process of building competitive advantage rapidly changing, short-term and contextual. These findings aid the evolution of strategic management practices in universities by providing empirical insights in determining the impactful changes and their connection to evolutionary learning. It also stresses the importance of using the developed model as a decision support system to generate, regulate and retain student experience and expectations. This research paper provides first-hand insight into the impactful changes affecting universities’ vision and how they can turn these changes to their advantages and set a road map to design-develop models to integrate and regulate these essential changes in their strategies using evolution learning mechanism and digital transformation strategy.

Similar content being viewed by others

Impacts of digital technologies on education and factors influencing schools' digital capacity and transformation: A literature review

Learning environments’ influence on students’ learning experience in an Australian Faculty of Business and Economics

Balancing Technology, Pedagogy and the New Normal: Post-pandemic Challenges for Higher Education

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

The world we live in is changing at a fast pace and what we teach and how we teach is also evolving rapidly. How can our education systems be reshaped to foster learner first approaches while also keeping up to date with the growing demands of the twenty-first century?

In recent years, universities worldwide have been experiencing rapid impactful changes, which are influenced by technological advancement and social e-trends towards digitalization. Like all other revolutionary changes, digital transformation involves intense adjustment/re-adjustment. The powerful changes in the socio-economic-education system resulting from the globalized economy have led to propelling changes specifically in higher education such as education’s standard, quality, decentralization, virtual and independent learning. These drivers (trends) in the realm of education promote collectively transnational education. Digitalized education delivery could be viewed as one of the alternative mechanisms to fill the enrolment gap. This phenomenon is viewed as digital entrepreneurship (Rosin et al., 2020 ). However, this domain is arguably still in the infancy stage and differs in scope a lot specifically examining the key benefits of digital transformation, and its entrepreneurial capabilities from a university’s perspective.

For integrating digital transformation capabilities, universities leverage their delivering capabilities through offshore branches or transnational distance learning however, students will inevitably depend heavily on digitalisation of education primarily driven by information communication and technology. The widespread globalized education has radically influenced the universities to shape their learning and development, delivery and continuous improvement mechanisms. Universities may no longer be dependent upon the traditional forms of learnings to cope up with the challenges posed by the phenomenon-globalization.

The above phenomena have collectively made the process of building competitive advantage rapidly changing, short-term and contextual. The main aim of this paper is to develop a qualitative model that advocates how digital transformation as a propelling force could be used to build competitive advantage. The qualitative model is derived via (a) critically examining the appropriate definitions/process of building advantages, (b) examining the impactful changes in the global education industry, (c) exploring the strategic elements of evolutionary learnings, (d) exploring the drivers that shape the digital transformation in the age of globalization and (f) by critically evaluating these phenomena collaboratively creating world-class delivery, digital program management and superior student experience capabilities.

Digital transformation in the global education industry validates the future roadmap to sustainable education management. Gaining relatively a sustainable position for universities demands their preparedness to adapt to impactful changes imposed by the macro environment, and also integrating the key trends as part of their digital transformation strategy. This paper also sheds light on (a) enhancing the understanding of higher education competitive advantages specific to digital transformation strategy, (b) its impact on institutional management and performance, (c) developing empirical insights by performing comparative studies and analysis of the strategic elements of evolutionary learnings and (d) examining the drivers that shape the digital transformation in post-covid-19 pandemic.

Intending to deliver the highest quality education, enabling world-class education experience and transforming the students to cope up with the globalized industry demands are the underpinning motives of the digital transformation strategy (DTS). The spending on digital transformation capabilities are pruned by universities to minimise the capital expenditure. However, they failed to understand the fact they are spending on DTS they are also investing in building sustainable competitive advantages (SCA) which is very likely to reflect upon the future profitability. It needs to be highlighted that particularly in the UAE, the public sector universities are increasingly investing in DTS for two primary reasons (a) complying with the high-quality standard set by the Ministry of Education (MOE) and (b) building advantages to compete in the global educational landscape.

Digital transformation leads to resource savings by not only optimally utilizing the resources but also avoiding regular budget constraints, as in general, it goes through a selective and structured approach (Carter et al., 2020 ; Powell & McGuigan, 2020 ). Digital transformation is used as a means to attract sufficient and upper-class students, improving students’ experience, accessibility, deliver quality teaching materials and provide them blended learning. However, top universities are more reluctant to take advantage of the opportunities of the digital era. Global phenomena such as the introduction of the internet, information exchange, digitalization, virtualization and social media have made the digital transformation strategy inevitable for universities to stimulate student experience, particularly the delivery of education, meaning, the increasingly digital transformation process has become a dependable platform to design, develop and retain competitive advantages.

Digital transformation in the global education industry validates the future roadmap to sustainable education management. The prerequisite for gaining relatively a sustainable position for universities’ demands their preparedness to adopt the impactful rapid changes imposed by the macro environment, and also integrating the key trends as part of their digital transformation strategy.

In the higher education industry, the notion of building competitive advantage is challenged by the digital revolution and transformation, globalization, information exchange, network society and social media. This paper sheds light on (a) enhancing the understanding of higher education competitive advantages specific to digital transformation strategy, (b) its impact on institutional management and performance, (c) developing empirical insights by performing comparative studies and analysis of the strategic elements of evolutionary learnings and (d) examining the drivers that shape the digital transformation in the post-covid-19 pandemic.

The aim of this paper is to develop an integrated qualitative model which examines how the radical changes enable universities to build competitive advantages using digital transformation and its impact on students’ experience. The main objectives are:

Critically examines the contemporary literature of impactful changes, the process of building advantage, digital transformation and how it impacts universities.

Determine and establish a logical connection among this phenomenon to signify the potential shock, thereby develop numerous future research propositions.

The research questions are: how digital transformations enable universities to develop sustainable competitive advantages by stimulating supreme student experiences? What is the role of evolution learning in developing digital advantages? And what sort of opportunities information technology develops for the digital transformation process?

The paper develops a fundamental qualitative model derived from a) critically examining the appropriate definitions/process of building competitive advantages, (b) measuring the impactful changes in the global education industry, (c) assessing the tools that shape the digital transformation in the age of globalization and (d) by critically evaluating these rapid changes collaboratively creating world-class delivery, digital program management and superior student experience capabilities.

A relevant significance of how universities could use the digital capabilities to transform deliveries and student experience, the synthesis links the theory to practice. The process of building competitive advantage for universities remains lacking, the paper provides first-hand insight into the impactful changes influencing universities and how they can transform to their advantages. It also develops constructive debates specifically in the subject matters that are not well discussed in the literature.

This paper is structured as follows: the first section discusses the importance of the global education industry by capturing the key changes. Then it sheds light on the process of building competitive advantages. Further, by introducing the impactful changes (uncertainties) the paper examines how evolutionary learning enables universities to sensibly use IT capabilities to build digital advantage. Finally, we emphasize how the digital transformation strategies build advantages specifically on delivery, digital-oriented programme management and enhancing the world-class student experience.

2 Literature review

2.1 the impactful changes in the global higher education.

In the age of globalization universities globally need to react/respond to the worldly changes/trends/demand in terms of academic standard, academic quality, research knowledge and filling the knowledge gap of societies. Regularly meeting those changing needs become a centric emphasis or strategic priority. Recent researchers have found that higher education particularly in developing countries has grown at a staggering rate in the last decade. UAE attempts to promote itself as an “educational hub” in the Middle East. Relatively, an area for improvement is perusing a high standard of education among public, private and international universities. By adapting to the impactful changes universities are likely to become more innovative, entrepreneurial and readily respect for those key impactful changes (Mok, 2008 ).

2.1.1 Standard of higher education

The standard of higher education impacts the delivery, operations and portability of educators. It aims to actively engage students in examining their learning outcomes. This process assures dependable knowledge is taught/build according to a particular curriculum. The assessment programmes validating the student learnings that need to comply/satisfy the standard of requirements/process of various accrediting bodies such as Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB), Quality assurance Agency (QAA) and Commission for Academic Accreditation (CAA). CAA is an accreditation programme that regulates the UAE’s universities and educational institutions in terms of quality, delivery and governance (Remache, 2019 ). Despite the aggressive quality standardisation across UAE universities using- AACSB and QAA, very little are known about how the standard of education influencing the higher education (HE) in the Middle East (Verger et al., 2016 ).

The global accreditation bodies such as (AACSB, QAA, CAA) demand collective involvement/collaborative actions from academic directors, programme managers, faculties and quality assurance specialists but serving in distinct accountabilities. Both standards enable the universities workers to gain decision making roles, inherit leadership skills and demonstrate a high level of commitment within their work layers to achieve sizeable growth. Specifically in the UAE, the CAA standard provides a standard platform (tool) for universities to transform themselves as independent entities in the rapidly changing educational environment. Ultimately, the standards develop the roadmap for professional governance and sensibly influence the decision-making capacity across multiple levels. By adopting one of those standards, universities’ collaborative governance is reinforced. It is also shaping the span of control and streamlines the universities operation.

Thus, it has become inevitable for the universities to adopt an accreditation standard according to their operational requirements and the beneficial outcomes are reflected upon universities internal capabilities, continuous improvement, introducing a diversity of courses total revenue and profitability. Thus, the standard of education must be viewed as an impactful change, it exerts pressure. Governments seek to cut costs by urging universities to offer degrees over reduced periods of study, or else periods of study taking place whilst the student is in full-time employment. Again the badge, which is the accreditation by such and such a university, is important (Kelley et al., 2010 ).

2.1.2 Quality of education

Quality of education has become a sustainable goal for many universities worldwide, educational quality relatively requires focus and empirical discussion as it’s an inherent but contextual measure. The strategic importance of quality in education is getting increasing attention among the different stakeholders such as academics, researchers, universities, regulators and nations. Managing quality in education is a complex challenge since it is a multidimensional concept. Universities treat quality as one of their critical feature which demonstrates.

Enrich the overall quality in the research knowledge, specifically in the postgraduate system

Cultivating creativity in the educating systems

The notions of adopting quality in the education system have made a few nations build competitive advantage, which leads them to be transformed into a hub of education-learning, developing and retaining global knowledge base which is translated into the economic benefits i.e., UK, USA and Singapore. Innovative ways of teaching/lecturing and assessments are introduced to prioritise creativity, innovation, critical thinking and increasingly, there is an emphasis on broad cross-disciplinary education.

2.1.3 Virtual learning

Virtual learning increasingly becomes important for the universities amidst the 2019’s pandemic. It is important to extend the critical stance of virtual learning beyond the IT tool and instrumentalisation. Therefore, universities must explore how they could amalgamate humanistic qualities with virtual learning in order to assure collaboration and engagement otherwise they would generate in the face to face learning (Powell & McGuigan, 2020 ).

Virtual learning technology has been growing at a staggering rate and its use particularly in transnational universities has become more widespread. This phenomenon has impacted particularly the instructional methods and their delivery. More importantly, the delivery practices of the universities have significantly evolved in the recent past. This marvel has created a window of opportunity for universities to focus on blended learning, a combination of independent computer-based learning, online communication and face to face learnings. Virtual learning has also established the online platform to establish powerful informal networks (study groups), these are used by the students to share information and facilitate their connection. Virtual learning becomes an influencing process to facilitate collaborative sharing. However, still, universities face various challenges in terms of know-how of virtual tools, developing integration capabilities, protection of data and establishing a scalable online security mechanism. Meaning, a worthy, scalable and reliable practices for virtual learning is a necessity to cater to diverse and transnational students using both synchronous and asynchronous communication mechanisms.

Virtual learning also creates a window of opportunity for universities to inclusiveness and diversity. This process/mechanism enables universities to cater a wide range of transnational students, building capabilities in this channel enables universities to gain a strategic positioning in the global education industry (Chatzoglou & Chatzoudes, 2018 ; Del Valle Mejías, 2020 ). The introduction of open-source technologies has increased the attractiveness of virtual learning. It radically has reduced the fixed cost of investing in virtual technologies to stimulate or leverage their virtual learning mechanism.

Virtual learning not only enables transnational students to the education accessible but also overcomes students’ disabilities by limiting the physical movement but facilitating their engagement (Gerrard, 2007 ). Virtual learning as a phenomenon has created a new ideology- virtual space, which defines the boundaries in which the entire virtual learning happens. Despite there is a growing debate about the virtual space and its role, subject matters experts have centred their arguments on the architecture of the space than the learning process itself. This growing emphasis enabled the universities to revisit the key elements used to build the digital transformation of universities (Hall & Zentgraf, 2010 ).

2.1.4 Independent learning

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the traditional learning process of universities was frozen. Universities are left with no options but to develop an agile learning mechanism to connect various geographical locations, distinct courses and different time zones. In this context independent online-based learning system/mechanism has value-added universities, immensely. The aim of independent learning is to inspire learners to master various relevant disciplines to enter the work field. Specifically, it deals with (a) learning content, (b) technical know-how and (c) other competencies. Ideally, the universities should develop an independent learning model which integrates the learners study programmes with the changing demand of the industrialized world. So, establishing an empirical pattern of learning design becomes a necessity. Thus it is critical for the universities to build their unique independent learning model to encourage students to learn and create more opportunities for work (Sudirtha et al., 2021 ).

Previous studies have identified that independent learnings promote entrepreneurial ability/characteristics among students and which is viewed as one of the most important priorities of universities (Sudirtha et al., 2021 ). Although universities are migrating some elements/aspects of education in the form of independent learning primarily online, it requires remote learning and digital tools support mechanisms to make it more effective or to create an economic shock (Carter et al., 2020 ). Inevitably it has become a process imparted by many universities to penetrate the learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

One of the other critical changes in independent learning is that how to enable students to decide what online/offline sources to select and use (Harris et al., 2020 ). It was found that independent learning positively impacts the motivation, performance and self-efficacy of students (Boyer et al., 2013 ). Dissemination is one of the key elements of independent learning and the current pandemic situation further stems its prevalence across multiple layers of learning (Sudirtha et al., 2021 ). Universities prioritize adopting necessary tools for promoting independent learning, its applications and dissemination.

2.1.5 Decentralization of education

Factors such as a scale of operation, offshoring of education and virtual educations have increasingly challenged to decentralize their education and educational resources. Comparatively, decentralization of education is a standard strategy for catering for a wide range of students and improving the education services delivery (Parry, 1997 ) however, some researchers argue that, yet it has failed to live up to the expectation, worldwide. Adopting effective decentralization of education requires the universities to develop specific roles to support the process of decentralization because decentralized institutions often lack technical competencies and the unavailability of budget to perform their function as good as their mother universities (Mwinjuma et al. 2015 ).

One of the critical challenges of decentralization of education is to deliver education with optimum quality. Improving quality constantly and ensure the availability of timely budget are required for universities to consistently meet the high expectation set by the decentralisation of education which must be reflected in the student education experience (Studies, International and Centre, 2015).

2.2 The digitalization of competitive advantage

The notion of strategy and building competitive advantages are intrinsically inter-related. However, the strategy discipline requires deep understanding and wide application across global industries (Czainska, 2009 ; Mok, 2008 ; Stonehouse & Snowdon, 2007 ). Particularly, having considered the radical changes happening at a staggering rate in the global education industry, strategy discipline demands new and specific definitions. This phenomenon enabled the researchers to develop new definitions and research propositions in the discipline of building competitive advantages (O’Shannassy, 2008 ). As far as the universities are concerned there are three fundamental questions underpinning the process of building advantages:

Industry attractiveness to gain long term profitability

The drives determining both the attractiveness and the profitability (Jelinek & Porter, 1992 ).

Relative industry positioning of the universities to gain the power to accredit university degrees or professional qualifications.

The fundamental idea here is that not all the global industries provide an equal window of opportunities to produce long term profitability but it is actually the usual profitability of the industry that is one necessary factor determining the firm’s profitability in an industry (Chatzoglou & Chatzoudes, 2018 ; Huggins & Izushi, 2015 ; Mok, 2008 ).

As indicated the impactful changes across the education industries have arguably standardised the critical success factors underpinning the competitive advantages. This phenomenon has made the universities compete globally for delivery, faculties and students. Porter ( 1992 ) argues competitiveness can occur when two universities meet the test or experience of international competition where the educational standard or experience of students can be measured or maintained. This indicates that both the universities and their workforce need to collaboratively work together to produce advantages via various fronts (Huggins & Izushi, 2015 ; Stonehouse & Snowdon, 2007 ). For the collaboration to happen there is the only way which is for the universities to increase the overall productivity. Meaning, both the universities and the workforce can produce high-value output (O’Shannassy, 2008 ).

Despite the existence of radical changes, the resource implications, agile nature and digital transformation, we argue that the fundamental process of building advantage for universities can be plotted in a most simplistic form as below incorporated in Fig.  1 , the approach in which in most of the global industries some organisation makes superior profits in spite of the average profitability of the industry. This approach is important specifically for universities to identify and determine where to harvest and where to invest within the scarcity of economic resources.

The underlying approach for universities to build advantages. Sources (Huggins & Izushi, 2015 ; Stonehouse & Snowdon, 2007 )

This process is in line with the main discussion of (Porter, 1985 ; O’Shannassy, 2008 ). Most importantly, porter (1986) developed this idea within the boundaries of industrial economics, however, one could argue the competitive ideas are relative, increasingly becoming short term and industry-specific (reference), further, he relates this idea to industry structure and the nature of the completion to present a powerful case (Chatzoglou & Chatzoudes, 2018 ; Mok, 2008 ; O’Shannassy, 2008 ).

The global education industry is undergoing rapid changes, particularly; the propelling forces of information technology (AI, big data, IoT and Cloud) have increasingly shaped the notion of how universities build competitive advantages (Klug, 2014 ; Kiryakova et al., 2017 ; Totty et al., 2019 ). Digital transformation strategy has provided digital but internet-driven solutions for the entire element of the value chain, thus universities can be exceptions here (Rosin et al., 2020 ).

This process has not only generated unique and innovative business models worldwide, but the universities have become increasingly entrepreneurial (Chatzoglou & Chatzoudes, 2018 ). This paper builds a compelling and relevant case by critically examining the global education industry; this integrated developed framework will become a powerful conceptual technique for universities to stimulate students’-education-experience (Fig.  2 ).

Universities competitive advantage structure. Sources (Huggins & Izushi, 2015 ; Mok, 2008 ; Stonehouse & Snowdon, 2007 )

3 Digital transformation strategy

In the information age, specifically, universities have steered numerous initiatives to explore unique digital technologies to enhance students’ experience in learning. This requires a transformation of critical operations that influence the product portfolio, the delivery itself, integration and organisational structure (Matt et al., 2015 ; Shaughnessy, 2018 ). Universities requires combination of technical and cultural change. Guiding the transition to the digital culture is a challenge. Digital transformation strategy not only modified the educational delivery models of universities but also has redefined students in demanding globalized education (Kane, 2017 ; Powell & McGuigan, 2020 ; Rosin et al., 2020 ).

From a universities perspective, digital transformation strategies are aimed to (a) increase the total revenue (b) enhance productivity (c) generate value through innovative practices and (e) develop a brand reputation and novelty (Matt et al., 2015 ; Shaughnessy, 2018 ). Universities need to determine digital transformation management practices to manage complex transformation strategies (Angelopoulos, Christina and Yannis, 2019 )). Meaning, they need to formulate agile, realistic and scalable digital transformation strategies that assist as the centric philosophy that integrates the entire university’s function. The utilization and integration of digital technologies enable universities to go beyond their conventional virtual borders, influencing the portfolio of courses, regulating the delivery model and the entire value chain of a university (Kane, 2017 ; Matt et al., 2015 ).

Scholars argue that the underlying composition of digital transformation strategy is described by (a) increasing use of technologies (b) ability to create values (c) supporting structural changes (d) and economic gains (Matt et al., 2015 ; Shaughnessy, 2018 ). However, this research paper claims that due to the increasing domination of digital technologies, the landscape of digital technologies is in the changing margin. It is the technology elements directly or indirectly influencing other elements (b, c and d), so there is an essential need to develop new definitions in this regard (Fig.  3 ).

The changing landscape/composition of digital transformation strategy. Sources (Matt, Hess and Benlian, 2015 ; Shaughnessy, 2018 ; van Tonder et al., 2020 )

The entrepreneurial digital space of universities is dominated by artificial intelligence, cloud computing, big data and IoT. Thus, there is a necessity to explore how universities sensibly utilize to build advantages through digital transformation.

3.1 Artificial intelligence

The dawn of artificial intelligence (AI) is rooted in all the layers of education and the delivery of educational programmes in universities. AI is the simulation of human intelligence processes by machines, especially computer systems (What is AI, August 2018, p. 1). It is predicted that AI is projected to grow at the staggering rate of 48% in the global education industry between 2018 and 2022 (Meyer, 2019 ; Nicola & Dalessio, 2019 ). Koller ( 2018 ) stated that “Artificial Intelligence has the ability to personalize the learning experience to fit the individualistic needs of students” (Nicola & Dalessio, 2019 ). Particularly critical components of AI such as deep learning, machine learning, collaborated human–computer learning, and personalised learning has increasingly impacted mainstream learning methods of global education (Rouse, 2019 ).

As a result of AI, 375 million workers are expected to change occupation in the next ten years except if they are up skilled their know-how of AI. Further, about 70% of global organisations (including universities) will use AI capabilities to streamline their business operation (Nicola & Dalessio, 2019 ; Totty et al., 2019 ; Jia & Zhang, 2021 ). The changes in learning mechanism directly influence and stimulate the transformation in both the curriculum and the content delivery standards. Meaning, the phenomenon of AI has led to the formation of (a) intelligent curriculum development (b) intelligent teaching systems. AI as an educational tool can create a wide range of learning opportunities for the students by showing (a) where the students are making errors (b) how to make them pay attention (c) how to make them understand what they still need to learn (Meyer, 2019 , p. 1; Nicola & Dalessio, 2019 ). AI-based personalised education will be a huge revolution in terms of how future students will learn courses in universities. Further, the personalised learning approach is expected to increase the average IQ rate of university students.

Using AI for educational need/initiatives produce countless benefits for both the universities and the students but not limited to (a) development of intense and worthy learning materials (b) accurate grading of papers (c) speed release of student results and (d) tracking the mental health of students across the various programme. This collective phenomenon indicates that students can be referred to independent/automated support services in the future/it will become the usual standard (Meyer, 2019 ).

Currently, there is a significant need for universities to concentrates on (a) develop a correct understanding of AI and how it associates with teaching mechanism/pedagogies (b) influencing the usage of AI for research to develop models to explain complex phenomena and (c) developing intelligent classrooms that lead to “intelligent enabled universities”. When universities concentrate on using AI capabilities to build economic advantages, the development of entrepreneurial digital space/and its underlying technology AI becomes inevitable (Roberts, 2019 ; Totty et al., 2019 ; Miller et al., 2020 ; Noniashvili et al., 2020 ).

3.2 Cloud computing

In the age of globalization, the benefits of cloud computing are widespread. The phenomenon of cloud computing (CC) is viewed as “a new dawn” for education amid globalization (Sultan, 2010 , p. 109). It is defined as a universal model for enabling convenient sharing of critical information from a pool of computing resources (i.e., storage, network and applications) (Militaru et al., 2013 ; Ramachandran et al., 2014 ). Also, the CC is regarded as a model of computing resources that are rapidly configurable, sharable, deployable and accessible over a wide range of networks (Mell & Grance, 2011 ).

Cloud computing is hastily getting implemented in universities worldwide to improve student learning, accumulate research knowledge and tune virtual programme management capabilities (Klug, 2014 ; Ramachandran et al., 2014 ). Most importantly, it has become a propelling force and transforming business models of universities, enabled them to adopt innovative capabilities, fostered entrepreneurial mindset and enhanced their educational delivery efficiencies.

Literature on cloud computing reveals that most of the cloud implementations are happening in the USA, the UK and Europe and comparatively implementation of the cloud specifically in the emerging economies continues to be a niche area (Ramachandran et al., 2014 ). It is utilized by universities worldwide to deliver educational services in a more simplistic, secure and swift manner. It enables them to rationalise the universities resources- optimum utilization. The cloud approach to educational delivery depends upon various technologies such as the internet, virtualization, virtual reality, augmentation, grid computing, etc. In order for cloud computing to be very effective, it needs to possess five essentials’ elements according to (Klug, 2014 ; Ramachandran et al., 2014 ):

Just in time delivery—CC’s ability to deliver services as per the rapidly changing students’ needs, particularly.

Accessible via broad network—the availability of CCs via various types of networks across the globe.

Sharing resources & resource pooling- CCs ability to share, collaborate and exchange of information.

Measures of services delivery

Cloud computing virtualizes the intellectual resources, experiments lab and software applications, allowing the information exchange to be delivered using the internet, instead of being installed those resources in universities’ workstations. Cloud computing enables students, lecturers and researchers to experience services through new paradigms, which are stimulated by Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS) (Sultan, 2010 ). As such cloud computing has become an integral element of universities education systems/delivery models connecting particularly distance and online educational programmes. Increasingly, universities are implementing one of three cloud computing models to stimulate student experiences.

In this context what type of cloud computing model (IaaS, PaaS and SaaS) a university needs to adopt is continuing to be a complex, challenging and demanding question. When universities become serious in terms of switching over to cloud computing technology for their traditional computer labs, they have to choose the best alternative of CC deployment models such as:

Private cloud computing

Public cloud computing

Community cloud computing

Hybrid cloud computing

Thus, selecting the best alternative CC deployment model comes with a trade-off. The critical benefits the CC brings to the universities include (a) cost reduction of overall delivery (b) easy addition of virtual computing resources (c) gain process improvement (d) build integration capabilities (e) mobile access capabilities and (f) develop business continuity mechanism. The educational value (market value) of universities increases after it implements CC.

Universities in the Middle East particularly enters into agreements with various CC vendors IBM (US), Microsoft (US), Oracle (US), Amazon Web Services (US), to host the CC suits online (Marketsandmarkets.com, 2022 ). Specifically, in the Western countries the government has built dedicated IT/cloud infrastructure as a national initiative to facilitate universities to integrate CC as part of their digitalization strategy- the UK government spent GBP £12 million to build cloud infrastructure for the higher education industry to uplift the virtual delivery of education which includes collaborative shared storage, shared data management and application services (Information Age, 2011 Klug, 2014 ). Literature indicates universities get benefited from CC via various fronts but not limited to:

Scalability

Availability

Interoperability

Universities are struggling to build solid cloud prototypes using IT infrastructure. In some cases, they purchase third party clouds and facing immense challenges in terms of maintainability. In other cases, due to the adoption of CC, the universities were challenged to replace their legacy system; acquire new licences; manage the rising cost of attracting CC/relevant IT skills. We constructively argue that universities should focus on building an evolutionary learning system that provides universities to identify and determine the necessity for rationalizing the CC needs via an agile layer. Thus, a conceptual model must be developed in order to establish the empirical connection integrating evolutionary learning and the CC necessity.

On this basis, it becomes an internal process (unique, rare, and inimitable) but provides the competitiveness for the universities to build advantages. This process prioritizes the internal digital resources to build advantages, thus can be viewed as adopting a resource-based view (RBV) while formulating a digital strategy. In other words, it is developing internal CC capabilities via determined evolutionary learning offers a relative advantage to determine the digital transformation strategy and also contributes to the development of entrepreneurial digital space.

3.3 Internet of things

Literature on the Internet of things (IoT) reveals that the anticipated economic shock/impact by IoT is estimated to be about $2.7 to $6.2 trillion by 2025-worldwide. The greatest influence of IoT is expected to occur collectively in the manufacturing, healthcare and education sectors (Abad-Segura et al., 2020 ; Kiryakova et al., 2017 ; Tarabasz, 2016 ). This sensation indicates the universities should develop a dependable strategy to stand up to challenges posed by the IoT, specifically in terms of connecting various types of student devices using web 2.0. This process fosters the idea of developing smart universities to cater for the rapid changes in the education industry.

Arguably, the IoT has significantly changed the overall delivery of university-level teaching and learning. Connecting various hardware devices, operating systems and browsers need to be highlighted to a greater extent. Further, IoT not only connects university students but is also utilized as a platform/tool to retain them by delegating activities consistently, but it requires a bit more than IoT which is termed as the internet of everything (IoE) (Abad-Segura et al., 2020 ). Particularly, the development and dissemination of knowledge are significantly impacted by the IoT in the universities; this may have the potential to impact the engagement and activities of the students. From a strategic perspective, IoT enables the availability of technical devices associating with distinct technologies transforming conventional learning (human-oriented learning process). Students are much more engaged in the learning process and they can perceive and learn using all their senses. Opportunities for realization of personalized based interaction models of education are.

Automating many administrative activities.

Reporting the students’ cognitive activities.

Providing an appropriate learning environment.

for learners with special educational needs.

Stimulating learners’ creativity.

Creating an interactive innovative learning environment.

3.4 Big data

Big data becomes the underpinning structure of decision analysis. Analysing data characterizes arguably a big challenge for universities due to the number of data points they consider/consume as the sources of big data used by universities do not respond to structured data model/s. This paradox reveals that universities are not concentrating on data and generating new knowledge/outcomes (Online & Mar, 2013 ; Villegas-Ch et al., 2019 ).

Many universities do not have or developed big data capabilities/ as well as the data scientists to perform analysis to develop intelligent insights about their programmes, students’ distributions and their associations with various educational courses (behavioural patterns associated with the education) (Utica College, 2019 ). This phenomenon solidifies that universities require two fundamental elements as part of their big data strategy (a) a dependable technique that allows them to analyse the data in a superior way and (b) it should produce speedy results whenever necessary (Landon-Murray, 2016 ; Zeng & Liu, 2021 ; Zhang, 2021 ).

Performing conventional data analysis arguably doesn’t provide empirical insights to explore opportunities, it also generates accurate results and relatively consume more time generate sensitive results to respond to rapidly changing needs of competitive education.

We emphasise there is a burning need for universities to adopt the use of big data techniques to gain relevant, applicable and accurate results in time. The real-time data would help universities in making more improved and dependable decisions that reflect in educational learning and build advantages. We propose the utility of the big data closely integrated with the digital transformation strategy requires three critical elements (a) capacity to analyse the large size of data derived from multiple volumes (b) adequate speed in which data arrive/analysis is performed (c) using various/distinct data structure (structured, semi-structured and unstructured) (Huang, 2021 ; Kane, 2017 ; Online & Mar, 2013 ; Villegas-Ch et al., 2019 ) (Fig.  4 ).

The changing landscape/composition of big data strategy

We propose, when university adopts the big data strategy closely associated with the digital transformation, it incrementally contributes to the entrepreneurial digital space which a key to build advantage as far as the RBV is concerned.

3.5 Methodology

The paper synthesises the literature on how universities can build sustainable competitive advantage by leveraging evolutionary learning, Information Technology and digital transformation capabilities. The paper also attempts to develop a fundamental and a detailed model derived from the extensive literature review. Finally, the paper contributes to developing numerous research propositions. In a holistic view, this paper shed light on the strategic importance of developing the combination of empiricist and pragmatist views in developing digital advantages but using a unique approach.

Through the development and integration of numerous theoretical constructs, the paper highlights the significance of building sustainable competitive advantages for universities regulating the impactful changes within the capabilities of evolutionary learning and IT capabilities. Using the empirical evidence the paper emphasizes the need to test the detailed model in a comparative approach. Finally, the paper generates several suggestions for new research propositions.

3.6 Fundamental model

The fundamental model gives rise to several research propositions. It could be viewed as a new method for the objective development of digital advantages in higher education. The model also clarifies the underlying logic of the proposed research. The underlying logic of the fundamental model is the basis on which researchers could test the relationship among variables and validate the model adequacy. Thus, the fundamental model offers a new perspective on the phenomenon of building digital advantages of higher education.

It also draws on the existing literature and explains the research findings. Technically, the fundamental model develops and integrates the variables-view which demonstrates the importance of integration points. Thus, the researchers offer a new perspective on the phenomenon of how universities should adopt a standardised mechanism to integrate impactful changes build into developing competitive advantages, particularly using digital transformation strategy which reflects upon the competitiveness of the organisational performance. The model is significant in the evolution of how universities utilize their capabilities to build advantages in the global education industry and it is likely to be even more significant in the future (Fig.  5 ).

Variable view of the derived fundamental model. Sources (van Tonder et al., 2020 ; Matt, Hess and Benlian, 2015 ; Shaughnessy, 2018 )

4 The higher education model of digital transformation (Fig. 6 )

Sources (Abad-Segura et al., 2020 ; Carter et al., 2020 ; Kane, 2017 ; Matt et al., 2015 ; Powell & McGuigan, 2020 ; van Tonder et al., 2020 )

The development of the higher education model for digital transformation significantly aids the evolution of strategic management practices of universities by providing empirical insights on how to determine the impactful changes, its connection to evolutionary learning and the need to build advantages to be readily respected to the changing market conditions of education industry. It also stresses the importance of using empirical models as decision support systems to generate, regulate and retain student experience. A relevant, significant but limited brief of how universities could use the digital capabilities to transform deliveries and student experience, the synthesis links the theory to practice.

It is likely that by integrating digital transformation capabilities universities leverage their delivering capabilities through offshore branches or transnational distance learning however students will inevitably depend heavily on digitalisation of education primarily driven by information communication and technology. The widespread globalized education has radically influenced the universities to shape their learning and development, delivery and continuous improvement mechanisms. Universities may no longer be dependent upon the traditional forms of learnings to coup up with the challenges posed by the phenomenon-globalization. Thus, universities selectively use technologies to trigger paradigm shifts, where technology is used as a complex connecting mechanism to design, deliver and establish digital learning. In this context, digital transformation has become a necessity for universities, worldwide.

Generally, universities worldwide are pushed to improve their virtual administrative capabilities, efficiencies and accountabilities to satisfy the demand of various stakeholder parties. In brief, the impactful/radical changes in the macro environment accelerate the universities to shape or restructure the process of building advantages using digitalization. In some cases, universities have been under tremendous pressure from the government and demanding the public to re-structure/re-shape the education systems according to the impactful changes in socio-economic education and socio-political education. Thus, important to shed light on the impactful changes, their influence on DTS and how they stimulate educational experience via an empirical model.

Introducing a new integrated approach to higher education strategy constructed in this research paper s an interpretation/discussion on (a) critically examining the construct of impactful changes in higher education (b) sheds light on the strategic role of evolution learning/how it brings agility to universities (c) and the importance of forming logical structure in order to develop and determine a platform to develop the scope (digital strategy) of building advantages.

Second, the notion of building competitiveness/competitive advantages using digital transformation strategy is intrinsically interrelated. This is performed by linking Porters’ ( 1985 ) architecture of building advantages. Researchers have developed conceptual but empirical dispositions for universities to build sustainable competitive advantages (SCA) using (a) evolutionary learning and (b) digital transformation. As stated, the fundamental dispositions set the roadmap for how universities can build advantages using internal resources/capabilities-resource-based view. NRP-1 the process of building competitive advantage using digital resources is relative. NRP-2 Entrepreneurial digital space builds advantages for universities when their digital transformation creates economic values while engaging in competitive action. NRP-3 Attainment of digital advantages must be related to the profit norms of university (a dependable measure of profitability).

Fourth, the transformational advantages of the digitalization of universities are captured. It is found digital transformation strategy in the midst of globalization has resulted in (a) virtual learning and (b) virtual programme management capabilities which are aimed at providing world-class educational experience. At this juncture, the researchers have emphasised the importance of developing a testable empirical model integrating the variables discussed (variable view). NRP-4 Accumulated impact of digitalisation must be examined using an empirical model using an integrated approach.

Finally, the researchers have captured the entire research potential impact as part of digitalization strategy using the higher education digitalization model which advocates how the overall process of building competitive advantage should be built in the landscape of education. We emphasise that the detailed model is formulated using two measurements models including both latent and non-latent variables, thus this model must undergo testing using a mixed-method approach. NRP-5- The potential economic shock of a digital transformation strategy is dependent upon (a) digital core competencies and (b) digital usage. NRP-6 Development of entrepreneurial digital space moderates the impact of digitalisation of universities on the student experience. NRP-7 High education digital model must be tested among managerial workers to identify and determine the economic shock of digitalisation across universities.

Leaving the COVID behind, going forward and getting back to campuses, how will we think things will change? Do we need schools the same way that we have had in the past? The simple answer is that since none of us has really been to the future yet, we really don't know, but we think we could start getting an idea of what the answer might be if we get down to the basics and really start asking, so what are we educating for, why do we do it, for whom do our education services or systems serve? If we were to ask these questions around to somebody, and this really expands to or extends to all levels of education, that person is likely to respond the way that they were told in school what is education for, such as building good citizens.

6 Analysis and discussion

The global education landscape is greatly influenced by the growing significance of globalization/knowledge economy (Hancock, 2019 ). By examining the overall impact of DTS on education we could generate rich social resources (social capital) the modern digital transformation strategy could tap into/use. Both the developed and developing education systems have started reviewing their contemporary education systems, various new measures and reforms have been performed to enhance to quality of existing education and its competitiveness reflected upon enhancing the student experience. Particularly, the emerging economies are increasingly focusing on building competitive advantages using digital capabilities, and to a dependable level, this process brought monetary benefits. Singapore’s education transformation as a global education hub is a great case study for adopting digital advantages (Mok, 2008 ).

Previous researchers have found that artificial intelligence has profound implications for research. Big data plus increasingly sophisticated search engines and algorithms provide tools for pattern detection, and generating hypotheses and theories, which are potentially very effective in the art of prediction. Then there is the profound issue of the relationship between education and creativity (Landon-Murray, 2016 ) (University of California Berkeley, 2019 ).

Arguably, enhancing the competitiveness of global education requires building sustainable competitive advantages which involve (a) identifying advantages (b) make it relevant and (c) being sustainable for the long term. The specific changes aimed at streamlining the higher education system by design-developing transnational education models. This paper provides significant emphasis on examining the most contemporary reforms governing the transformational changes in the global education industry.

On this basis, (a) the impactful contemporary reforms (b) how universities adopt those changes into evolutionary learning and development (c) the integration of propelling information technological forces to build competitiveness and (d) how the integration of advantages leads to capitalise on the market opportunities in the higher education requires a strategic roadmap. This is a fundamental need for both local and global universities as far as digital strategy formulation is concerned.

There are many influences affecting education worldwide, particularly the digitalisation strategy of education. Relatively, those influences have created competitive challenges and opportunities for universities to foster their advantages. Globalization, Information exchange, information technology, digitization, virtualisation and virtualised tools have not only influenced the universities operations but also radically re-designed their delivery models. Many of these influences have not been taken into account in the strategies of Universities (Abad-Segura et al., 2020 ). The rate of change in education has been accelerated of necessity in the period of Covid-19. But this is an acceleration of a trend that has been emerging for some years. Universities have not factored in the growth over the last 10 to 15 years of massive online courses (MOOC’s). This phenomenon has not only demanded investment from the universities but also increasingly put pressure on universities to explore how to go about adopting a digitalisation strategy (Wilbur, 2016 ). The exception is their capital expenditure on buildings and at least in the UK, we notice large investments in but there are deeper trends, as the figure above demonstrates. Given the Internet, YouTube, MOOC’s, et cetera, there are many more efficient ways of gaining skills (Keynes, 1945 ) stated that economists should aim to become like good plumbers – acquired the skills); more efficient ways of learning skills and acquiring knowledge than the traditional lecture, halls of residence (Wikipedia contributors, 2019 ).

Notably, the increasing demand for distance learning reinforces the methods of lecture delivery and learning in classrooms that we are not familiar with it. This phenomenon is partially influenced by the internet and internet-based online tools. The emergence of online-educations tools have made a revolutionary change in the landscape of education, thus it has become an inevitable force/propelling force particularly in the strategy formulation process (Roberts, 2019 ). Although numerous pedagogical frameworks exist to inform programs and faculty of distance learning courses even before the introduction of the internet, digital transformation has increasingly alluring attention due to its dynamism (Roberts, 2019 ). Namely, it continues to enhance three distinct elements such as dialogue, structure, and autonomy to effectively deliver online education. As of today, digital transformation is viewed as the platform to overcome distance learning challenges, is also becoming a powerful force to stimulate distance learning mechanisms.

The argument that universities offer face-to-face individual tuition in lectures and small tutorials is rather fallacious. Tutorial groups get larger and larger to economise on staff time. Platforms like zoom, teams, webinars et cetera can offer a face-to-face experience for students. The last 18 months of the Covid 19 pandemic demonstrated increasing facility use of such platforms by students and staff. Furthermore, much university teaching tends to be linear – developing a topic logically one step at a time (building on a determined foundation). Of course, that is a necessary part of learning. But the instruments illustrated in the figure above are antithetical to such approaches. Yes, they do build upon a foundation, but they also encourage diffuse learning, connecting topics, pointing out relationships, acting like personalised search engines.

The instruments in the diagram above suggest that collaboration exceeds competitiveness as a source of advantage. Computing systems are distributed across organisations and between organisations. The boundaries of organisations become increasingly unclear as a result of global outsourcing. Research is often a distributed activity, in the sense that data, software programmes are open source. Researchers may be sharing ideas with no requirement that they know one another. Due to the competition for standardisations among worldwide universities, they need to compete against each other to offer to enhance the delivery of education and student experience. Thus, the competition enables the universities to remain overwhelmed and unsupported via many essential avenues.

The teachers and lecturers have limited visibility in terms of when universities shift to online education or changing the learning approach. AI has profound implications for research. Big data plus increasingly sophisticated search engines and algorithms, provide tools for pattern detection and generating hypotheses and theories, which are potentially very effective in the art of prediction. Then there is the profound issue of the relationship between education and creativity.

Due to dominations of increasing exposure to online educations and the availability of online content, protecting and streamlining the universities/ students’ content (intellectual property) becomes harder to safeguard. Or a process must carefully adopt using the existing/potential Courses in entrepreneurship, creativity, and self-development abound. But most often they consist of cases, stories about this or that entrepreneur, to-do lists, time management et cetera. But how to become creative? First, we might question the sense of the previous question “how to become creative?” maybe creativity is something of collective activity. In literary theory, we get the question – who is the author? Is it the audience? Or is it the writer? Or is it the director? Or is it individual members of the audience? Individual members of the cast……? We could go on forever. Like computing, creativity is distributed.

7 Conclusions

This study critically has examined the process and the trends in digital transformation strategy in higher education, during the period 2014 till 2021. However, the primary merits of this paper are its it the pragmatic disposition of viewing digitalization through an integrated approach linking impactful changes, evolutionary learning, digital entrepreneurship, digital competencies and reuse and digital advantages.

Digital transformation strategy is a forceful, evolving and beneficial strategy/initiative which requires a multitude of learning and development, technical, process and cultural (workforce) changes. Thus, digital transformation strategies must build capabilities to influence both student centricity and discipline centricity. When universities develop the right combinations of key composition (AI, CC and BD) of digital transformation needed to compete for the global competition, the entire university must be concerned about the ultimate goal/s of digitalization and how it is going to build superior values to the students/stakeholders. Meaning, digital transformation strategies originate with cross-functional elements and needs to be associated with the other functional strategies in the universities. But the alignment is believed to be a challenge. Thus, there is a serious need to develop digital transformation higher education models to examine the impact of the digital shock.

Digital transformation strategy should bring simplification and continuous improvement in the universities to build advantages. The phenomenon/technologies such as AI, CC, IoT and BD are expected to play vital roles in the current age of globalization. AI intelligence demands more rule engine-based applications and devices to gain its full potential- creating socio-economic benefits via AI-based distance learning. Further, AI becomes more profound, universal and consequential; it continues to influence how critical decisions are made in universities.

Cloud computing as a phenomenon is continuing to impact universities via two distinguished dimensions: (a) it promotes the utility of IT efficiency and kindles (b) organisational agility. Specifically, in universities, CC offers/creates a wide range of resources (virtual) for research, learning and teaching. It also creates a unique channel for the distribution of resources in a flexible and cost-effective way. As long as the universities are aware of what type of cloud/deployment model builds advantages to them, they can extend limited virtual resources, increase collaborating, enhance sharing, improve their delivery models and provide advanced learning tools to make the learning streamlined. These phenomena collectively demonstrate that CC plays an essential role in enhancing universities’ ability to diffuse research knowledge.

Universities use several types of student data to predict/stimulate their educational behaviours. The greater the sources better the results of prediction. Most importantly, universities must adopt a particular model to implement the big data process. It is believed that 60% of big data project implementation time is consumed in (a) identifying the data location (b) its analysis and (c) data cleansing.

IoT transformed the universities to build a new philosophical stance, which is, the delivery of any programme can be executed intelligently and remotely. The physical landmark of the students is taken out of the equation of modern day’s virtual delivery. Connecting from home is no longer a deception. It brings speed, efficiency and wide coverage to education delivery. In this channel, the IoT will bring new value-added advancements to education- particularly how education delivery must associate with the global students. It must be recognized that the complexities and challenges of universities while connecting and interacting with the students are in the increasing margin, utilizing IoT optimistically, entrepreneuristically and innovatively would enable universities to build advantages in this space.

In spite of the powerful and unique force of digital transformation, universities must develop an agile/evolutionary learning process/system in order to capture the impactful educational changes. It is the evolutionary learning process that must identify and determine the scope for adopting digitalization. It is also equally important the universities must develop the right combinations of functions and processors in order to stimulate the effectiveness of the accumulated impact of digitalization. Ultimately, digitalization strategy develops internal capabilities for universities and build sustainable competitive advantages, thus, adopting the notion of resource-based view enable them to foster sensible, logical and simple understanding.

Change history

03 february 2022.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10924-w

Abad-Segura, E., González-Zamar, M. D., Infante-Moro, J. C., & Ruipérez García, G. (2020). ‘Sustainable management of digital transformation in higher education: Global research trends’, Sustainability (Switzerland) , 12(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052107

Angelopoulos, M. K., Christina A. K, and Yannis A. P (2019) ‘Lean Management Through Digital Transformation: Challenges and Opportunities for the Energy and Public Utilities Industry’, Journal of Advanced research in management, 10 (2)

Boyer, S. L., Edmondson, D. R., Artis, A. B., & Fleming, D. (2013). Self-Directed Learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 36 (1), 20–32.

Article   Google Scholar  

Carter, R. A., Jr., Rice, M., Yang, S., & Jackson, H. A. (2020). Self-regulated learning in online learning environments: Strategies for remote learning. Information and Learning Science, 121 (5–6), 311–319. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0114

Chatzoglou, P., & Chatzoudes, D. (2018). The role of innovation in building competitive advantages: An empirical investigation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 21 (1), 44–69. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-02-2017-0015

Czainska, K. (2009). ‘Internationalisation as an Alternative Strategy for University Development Case Study of Poznan University College of Business and Foreign’

Del Valle Mejías, M. E. (2020). ‘Edmodo: una plataforma de e-learning para la inclusión’, Revista de Comunicación de la SEECI , pp. 17–28. https://doi.org/10.15198/seeci.2020.52.17-28

Gerrard, C. (2007). Virtual learning environments: Enhancing the learning experience for students with disabilities. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 24 (3), 199–206. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650740710762239

Koller, D. (2018) Artificial intelligence technology enhances the educational experience. TheCampanile. Available at 24 (3), 199–206. https://thecampanile.org/2019/05/04/artificial-intelligence-technology-enhances-educational-experience/

Hall, A. G., & Zentgraf, C. (2010). Virtual learning environments through a different lens: Potentials of the intermediate space. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 27 (3), 127–136. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650741011054438

Hancock, S. (2019). A future in the knowledge economy? Analysing the career strategies of doctoral scientists through the principles of game theory. Higher Education, 78 (1), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0329-z

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Harris, L., Dargusch, J., Ames, K., & Bloomfield, C. (2020). Catering for ‘very different kids’: Distance education teachers’ understandings of and strategies for student engagement. International Journal of Inclusive Education . https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1735543

Huang, J. (2021). ‘Path analysis of university education management based on big data technology’, 1881, pp. 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1881/4/042087

Huggins, R., & Izushi, H. (2015). The competitive advantage of nations: Origins and journey. Competitiveness Review, 25 (5), 458–470. https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-06-2015-0044

Information Age. (2011). Universities to share £12.m cloud services in England. Retrieved from http://www.information-age.com/channels/it-services/news/1599748/universities-to-share-125m-cloud-services.thtml

Jelinek, M., & Porter, M. E. (1992). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37 (3), 507.

Jia, S., & Zhang, X. (2021). Teaching mode of psychology and pedagogy in colleges and universities based on artificial intelligence technology. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1852 (3), 032033. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1852/3/032033

Kane, G. C. (2017). MetLife centers its strategy on digital transformation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 59 (1), 88.

Google Scholar  

Kelley, C., Tong, P., & Choi, B. J. (2010). A review of assessment of student learning programs at AACSB schools: A dean’s perspective. Journal of Education for Business, 85 (5), 299–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832320903449519

Keynes (1945). Keynesian Economics. [online] Investopedia. Available at: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/k/keynesianeconomics.asp

Kiryakova, G., Yordanova, L., & Angelova, N. (2017). Can we make Schools and universities smarter with the Internet of Things? TEM Journal, 6 (1), 80–84. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM61-11

Klug, W. E. (2014). ‘The Determinants of Cloud Computing Adoption by Colleges and Universities’, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses , (April), p. 186.

Landon-Murray, M. (2016). Big data and intelligence: Applications, human capital, and education. Journal of Strategic Security . https://doi.org/10.5038/1944-0472.9.2.1514

Matt, C., Hess, T., & Benlian, A. (2015). Digital transformation strategies. Business and Information Systems Engineering, 57 (5), 339–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-015-0401-5

Mell, P., & Grance, T. (2011). The NIST Definition of Cloud Computing (Special Bulletin 800–145). Retrieved from National Institute of Standards and Technology website: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-145/SP800-145.pdf

Meyer, A. (2019). Artificial intelligence technology enhances the educational experience. TheCampanile. Available at. https://thecampanile.org/2019/05/04/artificial-intelligence-technologyenhances-educational-experience/

Militaru, G., Niculescu, C., & Teaha, C. (2013). Critical success factors for cloud computing adoption in higher education institutions: A theoretical and empirical investigation. International Conference on Management and Industrial Engineering, 6 , 213–220.

Miller, T., Weber, R., & Magazzeni, D. (2020). Report on the 2019 international joint conferences on artificial intelligence explainable artificial intelligence workshop. AI Magazine, 41 (1), 103–105. https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v41i1.5302

Mok, K. H. (2008). Singapore’s global education hub ambitions: University governance change and transnational higher education. International Journal of Educational Management, 22 (6), 527–546. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540810895444

Mwinjuma, J. S., Kadir, S. A., Hamzah, A., & Basri, R. (2015). ‘A review of characteristics and experiences of decentralization of education’. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 3 (1). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.3n.1p.34

Nicola, C. B., & Dalessio, D. (2019). Artificial Intelligence and the Impact on Business Curricula. Academy of Business Research Journal, 3 (2019), 30–53.

Noniashvili, M., Dgebuadze, M., & Griffin, G. (2020). A new tech platform as an innovative teaching model in high schools in the Republic of Georgia. Journal of Eastern European and Central Asian Research, 7 (1), 95–103. https://doi.org/10.15549/jeecar.v7i1.386

O’Shannassy, T. (2008). Sustainable competitive advantage or temporary competitive advantage: Improving understanding of an important strategy construct. Journal of Strategy and Management, 1 (2), 168–180. https://doi.org/10.1108/17554250810926357

Online, G. I., & Mar, M. J. (2013). ‘How one university puts big data into curriculum’, pp. 1–3

Porter, M.E. (1985). Technology And Competitive Advantage. Journal of Business Strategy, 5 (3), pp.60–78.

Porter, M. (1992) Capital Choices: Changing the Way America Invests in Industry. Council on Competitiveness/Harvard Business School, Boston.

Parry, T. R. (1997). Achieving balance in decentralization: A case study of education decentralization in Chile. World Development, 25 (2), 211–225.

Powell, L., & McGuigan, N. (2020). Teaching, virtually: A critical reflection. Accounting Research Journal . https://doi.org/10.1108/ARJ-09-2020-0307

Ramachandran, N., Sivaprakasam, P., Thangamani, G., & Anand, G. (2014). Selecting a suitable cloud computing technology deployment model for an academic institute: A case study. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 31 (5), 319–345. https://doi.org/10.1108/CWIS-09-2014-0018

Remache, A. and Belarbi, A. (2019). Adapting ICT in Higher Education in the Developing World: Influencing Dynamics. International Journal of Economic Policy in Emerging Economies, 12 (3), p.1.

Roberts, J. J. (2019). Online learning as a form of distance education: Linking formation learning in theology to the theories of distance education. HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies, 75 (1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v75i1.5345

Rosin, A. F., Proksch, D., Stubner, S., & Pinkwart, A. (2020). Digital new ventures: Assessing the benefits of digitalization in entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 30 (2), 59–71.

Rouse, M. (2019). What is AI (artificial intelligence)? - Definition from WhatIs.com. [online] Search Enterprise AI. Available at: https://searchenterpriseai.techtarget.com/definition/AI-Artificial-Intelligence

Shaughnessy, H. (2018). Creating digital transformation: Strategies and steps. Strategy and Leadership, 46 (2), 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/SL-12-2017-0126

Stonehouse, G., & Snowdon, B. (2007). Competitive advantage revisited Michael Porter on strategy and competitiveness. Journal of Management Inquiry, 16 (3), 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492607306333

Sudirtha, I. G., Widiartini, N. K., & Anggendari, M. D. (2021). Development of 21stcentury skill learning designs through the application of the concept of independent learning in the vocational field. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1810 (1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1810/1/012062

Sultan, N. (2010). Cloud computing for education: A new dawn? International Journal of Information Management, 30 (2), 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2009.09.004

Tarabasz, A. (2016). The internet of things digital revolution in offline market. Opportunity or threat? Handel Wewnętrzny, 4 (363), 325–337.

Totty, M. (2019). The Worlds That AI Might Create. Wall Street Journal. [online] 14 Oct. Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-worlds-that-ai-might-create-11571018700?mod=ig_artificialintelligencereportoctober2019 . Accessed 7 Sep. 2021.

University of California, Berkeley. (2019). BAIR: Berkeley Artificial Intelligence Research. Retrieved from: http://bair.berkeley.edu

Utica College. (2019). Online Master of Science in Data Science Curriculum. Retrieved from: http://programs.online.utica.edu/programs/masters-data-science/curriculum

van Tonder, C., Schachtebeck, C., Nieuwenhuizen, C., & Bossink, B. (2020). A framework for digital transformation and business model innovation. Management (Croatia), 25 (2), 111–132. https://doi.org/10.30924/mjcmi.25.2.6

Verger, A., Steiner-Khamsi, G. and Lubienski, C. (2016). The emerging global education industry: analysing market-making in education through market sociology. G lobalisation, Societies and Education, 15 (3), pp.325–340.

Villegas-Ch, W., Palacios-Pacheco, X., & Luján-Mora, S. (2019). Management of educative data in university students with the use of big data techniques. RISTI - Revista Iberica De Sistemas e Tecnologias De Informacao, 19 , 227–238.

Wikipedia Contributors. (2019). John Maynard Keynes. [online] Wikipedia. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Maynard_Keynes

Wilbur, K. (2016). ‘Pharmacist continuing education degree program’, 1, pp. 1–6

www.marketsandmarkets.com. (2022). Middle East Cloud Infrastructure Services Market Report - 2022. [online] Available at: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/middle-east-cloud-infrastructure-service-market-232083679.html  Accessed 9 May 2021

www.intracen.org. (2015). Digital Transformation for Good. [online] Available at: https://www.intracen.org/digital-transformation-for-good/ . Accessed 7 Sep 2021

Zeng, F., & Liu, L. (2021). Improving the quality of ideological and political education in colleges and universities in big data age. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1852 (3), 032034. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1852/3/032034

Zhang, J. (2021). Application of big data collection-analysis-visualization in the teaching process of colleges and universities under the background of the epidemic. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1800 (1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1800/1/012009

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Westford University College, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

Mohamed Ashmel Mohamed Hashim

The Centre for International Business, Leeds, UK

Issam Tlemsani

Kingston University London, Kingston upon Thames, UK

Robin Matthews

RANPA, Moscow, Russia

LSC, London, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohamed Ashmel Mohamed Hashim .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original version of this article was revised due to missing Figure 6.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Mohamed Hashim, M., Tlemsani, I. & Matthews, R. Higher education strategy in digital transformation. Educ Inf Technol 27 , 3171–3195 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10739-1

Download citation

Received : 14 June 2021

Accepted : 30 August 2021

Published : 14 September 2021

Issue Date : April 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10739-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Impactful changes
• Virtual learning
• Evolutionary learning
• Competitive advantage
• Higher education
• Digital transformation
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Undergraduate Admissions
• Graduate Admissions
• Teacher Certification Options
• International Admissions Information
• Financial Aid & Scholarships
• Undergraduate Majors and Minors
• Master’s Programs
• Certificates of Advanced Study
• Doctoral Programs
• Online, Hybrid, and Flexible Programs
• Faculty and Academic Advising
• Career Services and Certification
• Undergraduate Peer Advisors
• Student Organizations
• Learning Communities
• For Families
• Study Abroad
• Field Placements & Internships
• Bridge to the City
• Spector/Warren Fellowship
• Orange Holmes Scholars
• Engaged BIPOC Scholar-Practitioner Program
• Research News
• Faculty Bookshelf
• Faculty Publications
• Grants & Awards
• Doctoral Dissertations
• Research Resources and Support
• Office of Professional Research and Development
• Atrocity Studies Annual Lecture
• Antiracist Algebra Coalition
• Ganders Lecture Series
• InquiryU@Solvay
• Intergroup Dialogue Program
• Otto’s Fall Reading Kickoff
• Psycho-Educational Teaching Laboratory
• The Study Council
• Writing Our Lives
• Center for Academic Achievement and Student Development
• Center on Disability and Inclusion
• Center for Experiential Pedagogy and Practice
• Latest News
• Upcoming Events
• Education Exchange
• Get Involved
• Advisory Board
• Tolley Medal
• Administration
• From the Dean
• Convocation
• Accreditation
• Request Info
• Grants & Awards

Disability Studies Graduate Alexis Wilner ’24 Wins Orlin Prize for Outstanding Honors Thesis

Alexis Wilner ’24 was awarded the David Orlin Prize for Overall Outstanding Thesis Project, as well as best professional studies thesis, at the 2024 Renée Crown University Honors Program Convocation on May 10. Wilner is a graduate of Syracuse University’s College of Visual Arts and Performing Arts’ drama program and the School of Education’s (SOE) Disability Studies minor program.

“By understanding the reasons for a lack of legal repercussions, support from unions, and training available, I reveal the consequences of a lack of accessibility in our industry,” Wilner explains. “Based on digital scholarship and personal interviews, I suggest a variety of ways in which companies and organizations can make their practices more inclusive.”

Wilner’s thesis provides examples of accommodations and initiatives to support all disabled theater artists. She also presents three case studies on exemplary productions and organizations that have curated authentic inclusion for their disabled production artists.

“Alexis’ work is truly exceptional and in line with the University’s commitment to accessibility, inclusion, and human thriving,” says Ashby. “All people deserve access to theater, be that as an audience member or through careers in all aspects of stage craft. It was an honor to work with Alexis on this project, and I can’t wait to see where she takes this work next.”

During her four years at Syracuse University, Wilner translated theory into practice by serving as a student representative for the University-wide Disability, Access, and Inclusion Council (DAIC), by consulting with Syracuse Stage on accessibility, and by organizing an inclusive theater collaborative cabaret and gallery night through DAIC’s Access Arts SU project in 2022.

“I am immensely grateful to win the Orlin Prize. Receiving a commendation from the Honors Program has been absolutely surreal,” Wilner says. “I have been interested in publishing my research in industry journals since the beginning of this process and am excited to finally pursue doing so with this award.”

Professor Danielle Taana Smith, Director of the Crown Honors Program , notes that the honors prize committee—made up of University faculty—choose best theses across five categories: creative, humanities, social sciences, science and engineering, and professional. These recipients receive an award of $1,000. The Orlin Prize winner for the “best of the best” thesis receives an additional $2,000.

“The Honors Thesis Project is an outstanding example of research and scholarship,” says Smith. “The threshold for receiving a prize is extraordinarily high, and the selection is always difficult.”

Press Release June 5, 2024

Spectrum Digital Education to Award $1 Million in Grants From Charter Communications 2024 Pledge

Charter Has Committed $10 Million in Grants Since 2017; Nonprofits Can Apply June 5-26

Share Article:

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share via email
• Copy article web url

STAMFORD, Conn. – Charter Communications, Inc., which operates the Spectrum brand of connectivity and entertainment services, today announced a commitment of $1 million to Spectrum Digital Education in 2024, bringing its total investment in the initiative to $10 million since 2017. Spectrum Digital Education awards grants to nonprofit organizations that work to expand access to connectivity tools, education and resources in the communities that Spectrum serves. Nonprofit organizations can apply to be considered for a grant between June 5 at 9 a.m. ET and June 26 at 5 p.m. ET on the Spectrum Digital Education grants page .

Spectrum Digital Education grants support programs that address a range of individual needs across Charter’s 41-state service area, including those to expand digital skills training for seniors, connect adults with professional advancement opportunities and provide students with the technology and resources they need for their education. Since its 2017 launch, Spectrum Digital Education has awarded 261 grants to 143 unique organizations to benefit over 163,000 community members, distribute more than 18,500 laptops and other devices, and sponsor over 40,000 classes focused on digital education.

“Spectrum Digital Education provides communities with the connectivity services and tools they need, as well as the skills to use those tools effectively,” said Rhonda Crichlow, Senior Vice President, Chief Diversity Officer for Charter Communications. “In partnership with nonprofits across our service area, Charter is working to connect families, seniors and individuals with the resources to harness technology to improve their lives.”

Spectrum Digital Education Fosters Future-Ready Communities

Through Spectrum Digital Education, Central Community House in Ohio has received $75,000 over the last four years to support digital education programs, including those that provide hands-on training to seniors on how to use their devices to monitor their health or connect with others. For the STEM Alliance in New York, a $20,000 grant supported its “Digital Navigator” program to provide community members with education on how to use important desktop and search applications and a special course on internet safety for seniors. Latinitas , a Texas-based nonprofit, has received $34,000 in grants over the last two years for programs like “Padres Digitales,” which offers a free, bilingual digital literacy program for adults seeking to improve their technology skills.

“‘Padres Digitales’ equips community members with the tools and resources they need to use technology effectively, whether to communicate with their child’s teacher, pay their bills or build a resume,” said Gabriela Kane Guardia, Executive Director of Latinitas. "Through the Spectrum Digital Education grant, we’ve been able to further expand the program, establish a computer lab, invest in more take-home devices and retain full-time staff members who are dedicated to the success of the program.”

To be eligible for a Spectrum Digital Education grant, organizations must serve communities within Charter’s 41-state service area and have 501C(3) tax-exempt status. More information on how to apply is available on the Spectrum Digital Education grants page .

About Charter

Charter Communications, Inc. (NASDAQ:CHTR) is a leading broadband connectivity company and cable operator serving more than 32 million customers in 41 states through its Spectrum brand. Over an advanced communications network, the Company offers a full range of state-of-the-art residential and business services including Spectrum Internet ® , TV, Mobile and Voice.

For small and medium-sized companies, Spectrum Business ®  delivers the same suite of broadband products and services coupled with special features and applications to enhance productivity, while for larger businesses and government entities, Spectrum Enterprise ®  provides highly customized, fiber-based solutions. Spectrum Reach ®  delivers tailored advertising and production for the modern media landscape. The Company also distributes award-winning news coverage and sports programming to its customers through Spectrum Networks. More information about Charter can be found at  corporate.charter.com .

Media Contact

[email protected]

Note to Editors: For updated images and video, please visit Charter’s media library .

Virginia Education, School Reports, Teachers Monthly School Reports, May–Aug. 1869, Part 3

About the project.

The Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, often referred to as the Freedmen’s Bureau, was established on March 3, 1865. The duties of the Freedmen’s Bureau included supervision of all affairs relating to refugees, freedmen, and the custody of abandoned lands and property. These documents come from the Records of the Superintendent of Education for Virginia, Series 4: School Reports. 

Additional resources are available on the Freedmen's Bureau Instructions Page . Please help us transcribe these records to learn more about the lives of formerly enslaved men and women in Virginia during the Reconstruction Era.

Monthly school reports of teachers, November 1865 and January 1866–June 1871, are arranged chronologically and were prepared on forms devised in the Office of the Superintendent of Education. The forms contain statistical data furnished by individual teachers concerning the number of pupils enrolled; attendance; subjects taught in day, night, and Sabbath schools; and the amount of tuition paid by students. Some forms also contain more lengthy narrative remarks by teachers. Some of the reports apparently pertain to non–Bureau schools. Filmed directly after the school reports is a bound register containing the names of teachers to whom forms and envelopes were sent, May 1869–June 1870; the names are arranged alphabetically by name of county.

About Project Difficulty

Level 1 - beginner.

Content: all typed Language: English Format: letters, diaries, flyers, pamphlets, and one-page documents Subject Area Expertise/Special Skills: none required

Content: mostly typed, handwritten in print, or otherwise very clearly written/readable Language: English Format: memorabilia, advertisements, image captions, telegrams, diaries, letters, notes Subject Area Expertise/Special Skills: none required

Level 3 - INTERMEDIATE

Content: typed and handwritten materials in cursive or print Language: English Format: newspaper clippings, scrapbooks, letters/diaries/notes that may include annotations or margin notes Subject Area Expertise/Special Skills: experience reading cursive writing may be useful

Content: handwritten materials, primarily in cursive or somewhat difficult to read (predominantly from the 19th and 20th centuries) , audio recordings that are relatively easy to hear/decipher, and scientific materials Language: English and/or other languages that use Roman script but may require the use of diacritics (French, Spanish, German, Italian, etc.) Format: audio recordings, letters, diaries, notes and other written materials, projects with templated fields and special instructions Subject Area Expertise/Special Skills: some knowledge of non-English Roman-character/script languages and diacritics may be useful, as well as experience reading cursive handwriting. A general knowledge or familiarity with scientific terminology.

Level 5 - ADVANCED

Content: handwritten materials in cursive (from the 19th century or earlier) or in a non-Roman script language, audio recordings that are difficult to hear or are not in English, specialty materials/projects such as numismatics projects and the Project Phaedra notebooks Language: foreign languages that use non-Roman characters (Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Greek/Cyrillic, Native American and Indigenous languages, etc.) and English Format: audio recordings, columned data/tables, manuscripts, letters, diaries, notes, currency sheets, coins Subject Area Expertise/Special Skills: knowledge of a specific language and access to a keyboard with the characters in that language may be required for certain projects. Experience reading cursive handwriting and familiarity with 19th century (or prior) handwriting and conventions/abbreviations may be useful, as well as knowledge of scientific terminology, astrophysics data, or linguistics.

Contributing members

Total pages