Exploring the Determinants of Appropriate Digital Technology Selection and Adoption in Higher Education = 고등교육에서 적절한 디지털 기술 선정 및 채택의 결정요인 탐색

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In today’s rapidly evolving digital era, digital education technologies have become essential tools for transforming teaching and learning experiences across the globe. As digitalization reshapes every sector from healthcare to industry, higher education institutions are under growing pressure to adopt inclusive, scalable, and sustainable technologies that enhance access, engagement, and global competitiveness. Aligning with global trends like Sustainable Development Goal (SDG 4) and Education 4.0, the strategic integration of such technologies is no longer optional but a critical driver of academic innovation and social equity. Understanding the appropriateness of digital technology becomes important in developing digital education in higher education. However, there remains the lack of study on appropriate digital education technology, which motivates the exploration of factors influencing the selection of appropriate digital technology.
The first study uses a systematic literature review (SLR) to investigate how digital technologies can enhance access, inclusiveness, and equity in digital education and to explore which factors are influencing the selection of appropriate digital technology in higher education. Through a pool of 64 analyzed primary articles (Google Scholar, Scopus, and IEEE), SLR identifies two key technology categories: (1) educational technologies (mobile learning, e-learning, online learning, blended learning, and digital learning) that support personalized and flexible instruction, and (2) supportive and enabling technologies (cloud computing, artificial intelligence (AI), the internet of things (IoT), blockchain, and digital technology) that foster innovation, secure infrastructure, and scalability. It also identifies 31 influencing factors that guide the selection of digital technology in higher education. These influencing factors are classified across three dimensions, covering sustainability, environment, and culture considerations. Then, the review introduces a conceptual framework that integrates these dimensions together with two technological aspects, which guide institutions in selecting appropriate technologies aligned with ethical standards, local relevance, and long-term sustainability. The review points out that it requires continuous monitoring and evaluation to ensure adaptability and technological impact. Additionally, this review provides a foundational pathway for future empirical research and informed policy toward inclusive, context-sensitive digital transformation in education.
Building upon the findings of SLR, the second study empirically examines the adoption of appropriate digital education using an integrated technology-organization-environment (TOE) – technology acceptance model (TAM) framework, extended with two additional constructs of appropriate technology (AT) and monitoring and evaluation (M&E). The results indicate that technological context, environmental context, and M&E practices significantly influence appropriate technology selection, whereas organizational context shows no significant effect. Furthermore, the study indicates that AT has a strong positive impact on perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEU), which subsequently shape behavioral intention to adopt digital technologies. These findings demonstrate that digital education technology selection and adoption is not a one-time decision but a cyclical process of selection, perception, intention, and continuous evaluation, particularly relevant in developing and resource-constrained higher education contexts.
These findings of the two studies provide practical guidance for university leaders, policymakers, and technology providers to prioritize the selection of digital technologies that are contextually appropriate, sustainable, and supported by monitoring and evaluation in resource-constrained higher education environments.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

오늘날 빠르게 진화하는 디지털 시대에서 디지털 교육 기술은 전 세계의 교수·학습 경험을 혁신하는 핵심 도구로 자리매김하고 있다. 디지털화가 의료에서 산업 전반에 이르기까지 모든 분야를 재편함에 따라, 고등교육기관은 접근성, 참여도, 그리고 글로벌 경쟁력을 제고할 수 있는 포용적이고 확장 가능하며 지속 가능한 기술을 도입해야 한다는 압력을 받고 있다. 지속가능발전목표(SDG 4)와 교육 4.0 등 글로벌 흐름에 부합하여 이러한 기술의 전략적 통합은 더 이상 선택의 문제가 아니라 학문적 혁신과 사회적 형평성을 촉진하는 중요한 동력으로 인식되고 있다. 이에 디지털 교육을 발전시키는 과정에서 디지털 기술의 적합성을 이해하는 것이 중요해지고 있다. 그러나 고등교육 분야에서 적합한 디지털 교육 기술에 대한 연구는 여전히 부족하며, 이는 적절한 기술 선택에 영향을 미치는 요인을 규명할 필요성을 제기한다.
첫 번째 연구는 체계적 문헌고찰 (SLR)을 통해 디지털 기술이 디지털 교육에서 접근성, 포용성, 형평성을 어떻게 향상시키는지, 그리고 고등교육에서 적합한 디지털 기술 선택에 영향을 미치는 요인이 무엇인지 분석하였다. Google Scholar, Scopus, IEEE를 통해 수집된 64편의 문헌 분석 결과, SLR은 두 가지 핵심 기술 범주를 식별하였다. 첫째, 개인화된 학습과 유연한 교육 방식을 지원하는 교육 기술(모바일 러닝, 이러닝, 온라인 학습, 블렌디드 러닝, 디지털 학습), 둘째, 혁신, 인프라 안정성 및 확장성을 촉진하는 지원 및 기반 기술(클라우드 컴퓨팅, 인공지능, 사물인터넷, 블록체인 등)이다. 또한 본 연구는 고등교육에서 디지털 기술 선택을 이끄는 31개의 영향 요인을 도출하였으며, 이들 요인은 지속가능성, 환경, 문화의 세 차원으로 분류되었다. 이어서 이러한 차원과 두 기술적 측면을 통합한 개념적 프레임워크를 제시하여 기관이 윤리적 기준, 지역적 적합성, 장기적 지속가능성에 부합하는 기술을 선택하는 데 참고할 수 있도록 하였다. 아울러 디지털 기술의 적응성 및 영향력을 확보하기 위해서는 지속적인 모니터링 및 평가가 필수적임을 강조하며, 향후 실증연구 및 정책 수립을 위한 기초적 근거를 제공한다.
SLR 의 결과를 기반으로 두 번째 연구는 적합한 디지털 교육 기술의 채택 과정을 실증적으로 검토하기 위해 기술-조직-환경(TOE) 프레임워크와 기술수용모델(TAM)을 통합하고, 적정기술(AT)과 모니터링 및 평가(M&E)를 확장 변수로 포함한 통합 모델을 활용하였다. 분석 결과, 기술적 맥락, 환경적 맥락, 그리고 M&E 활동은 적정기술 선택에 유의한 영향을 미친 반면, 조직적 맥락은 유의한 영향을 보이지 않았다. 또한 AT는 지각된 유용성(PU)과 지각된 사용용이성(PEU)에 강한 영향을 미치며, 이는 디지털 기술 채택 의도로 이어지는 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 결과는 디지털 교육 기술의 선택과 채택이 단발적 결정이 아니라 선택–지각–의도–평가로 이어지는 순환적 과정임을 보여주며, 특히 개발도상국 및 자원이 제한된 고등교육 환경에서 그 중요성이 두드러진다.
두 연구의 결과는 고등교육기관의 리더, 정책결정자, 기술공급자에게 자원이 제한된 고등교육 환경에서 맥락적 적합성, 지속가능성, 그리고 모니터링 및 평가가 뒷받침되는 디지털 기술 선택을 우선시해야 한다는 실천적 시사점을 제시한다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Abstract i
• Contents v
• Lists of Tables xiii
• Lists of Figures xv
• Chapter 1. Introduction 1
• 1.1 Background and Motivation 1
• 1.2. Problem Description and Research Gaps 5
• 1.3. Research Objective and Research Questions 7
• 1.4. Research Philosophy and Philosophical Point of View 9
• 1.5. Research Methodology Overview 11
• 1.5.1 First Study: The Systematic Literature Review (SLR) 11
• 1.5.2 Second Study: Methodology Descriptions and justification 12
• 1.6. Research Outline 12
• Chapter 2. Foundational Concepts and Theories 26
• 2.1 Introduction 26
• 2.2 Definition of Digital Education Technologies 26
• 2.3 Appropriate Digital Education Technologies 27
• 2.4 Emerging Technologies 28
• 2.5 Technology Adoption Theories 30
• 2.5.1 Technology–Organization–Environment (TOE) Framework 30
• 2.5.2 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) 32
• 2.5.3 Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) 33
• 2.5.4 Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) Framework 34
• 2.5.5 Diffusion of Innovations (DOI) 35
• Chapter 3. Factors influencing the selection of appropriate technology to enhance access, inclusiveness, and equity in higher education: A systematic literature review 37
• 3.1 Introduction 37
• 3.1.1 Background 37
• 3.1.2 Motivation and Problem Description 39
• 3.1.3 Research Objective and Research Questions 40
• 3.1.4 Methodology 41
• 3.2. Related Work 42
• 3.2.1 Government and university policy 42
• 3.2.2 Socio-economic factor 44
• 3.2.3 Technology applications in education 45
• 3.2.4 Building digital education model focus on existing literature findings 51
• 3.2.5 Research Gap 56
• 3.3 Methodology 58
• 3.4 Analysis of Results 67
• 3.4.1 Descriptive Analysis 67
• 3.4.2 Digital technologies in education 72
• 3.4.2.1 Accessible digital learning platforms 74
• 3.4.2.1.1. e-Learning 74
• 3.4.2.1.2. Mobile learning 75
• 3.4.2.1.3. Online learning 77
• 3.4.2.1.4. Blended learning 78
• 3.4.2.1.5. Digital learning 79
• 3.4.2.2 Enabling and supportive technologies 80
• 3.4.2.2.1 Digital technology 80
• 3.4.2.2.2 Cloud computing (CC) 81
• 3.4.2.2.3 Artificial intelligent (AI) 83
• 3.4.2.2.4 Internet of Things (IoT) 84
• 3.4.2.2.5 Block chain 85
• 3.4.3 Factor Affecting the Selection of Digital Technologies in Education 86
• 3.4.3.1 Sustainability related factors in digital education technology 89
• 3.4.3.2 Environmental related factors in education technology 109
• 3.4.3.3 Cultural related factors in education technology 117
• 3.4.4 Opportunities using digital technology in education 126
• 3.4.4.1 Digital ecosystems for lifelong learning 127
• 3.4.4.2 Inclusive and personalized learning 128
• 3.4.4.3 Teachers or Instructors 128
• 3.4.4.4 Students or Learners 129
• 3.4.4.5 Collaboration and academic success 129
• 3.4.4.6 Sustainability and emerging technologies 130
• 3.4.5 Appropriateness and sustainability in the integration of digital technologies in education 130
• 3.5 Discussions and Implications 133
• 3.5.1 Summary of the findings 133
• 3.5.2 Implications 134
• 3.5.2.1 Implications on the selection of appropriate technology in education 134
• 3.5.2.2 Implications on factors influencing digital technology 138
• 3.5.2.3 Implications on building foundational framework for appropriate digital education model 140
• 3.5.3 Comparative implications of two digital education models 144
• 3.6 Conclusion 147
• 3.6.1 Summary 147
• 3.6.2 Limitations and future research 149
• Chapter 4. Understanding the Adoption of Appropriate Digital Education Technologies in Higher Education: An Empirical Investigation through TOE-TAM Framework 151
• 4.1 Introduction 151
• 4.1.1 Background 151
• 4.1.2 Motivation and Problem Description 153
• 4.1.3 Research objective and research questions 154
• 4.1.4 Methodology Overview 155
• 4.1.5 Contribution 157
• 4.2 Related Work 158
• 4.2.1 Integration of TOE and TAM in digital education 158
• 4.2.2 Sustainability and digital technology in higher education 162
• 4.2.3 Conceptualization of Appropriate Technology (AT) 163
• 4.2.4 Theoretical distinctions between Appropriate Technology (AT) and TOE–TAM Constructs 166
• 4.2.5 The role of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) in digital technology adoption in Higher Education 167
• 4.2.6 Research gap 171
• 4.3 Theoretical background and hypothesis development 179
• 4.3.1 Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) framework 179
• 4.3.1.1 Technology contexts 180
• 4.3.1.2 Organization contexts 182
• 4.3.1.3 Environment contexts 186
• 4.3.2 Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) contexts 189
• 4.3.3 Appropriate Technology Selection (AT) 191
• 4.3.4 Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) framework 193
• 4.3.4.1 Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) 194
• 4.3.4.2 Perceived usefulness (PU) 195
• 4.3.4.3 Behavior intention (BI) to adopt appropriate digital education technology model 196
• 4.4 Proposed research model and hypothesis development 197
• 4.5 Development of measurement items and construct operationalization 199
• 4.5 Findings and Analysis 202
• 4.5.1 Data sample and procedure 202
• 4.5.2 Descriptive Statistics 204
• 4.5.3 Research Model Data Analysis 212
• 4.5.4 Assessment of Measurement Model 213
• 4.5.4.1 Reliability and Validity 213
• 4.5.4.2 Model Fit 222
• 4.5.4.3 Explanatory power assessment for the model 224
• 4.5.4.4 Structural Model Assessment 226
• 4.5.4.5 Mediating effect of Appropriate Technology (AT) 231
• 4.5.5 Discussions 234
• 4.5.5.1 The Influence of Technology Context (TC) on Appropriate Technology (AT) Selection 235
• 4.5.5.2 The Influence of Organization Context (OC) on Appropriate Technology (AT) Selection 236
• 4.5.5.3 The Influence of Environment Context (EC) on Appropriate Technology (AT) Selection 238
• 4.5.5.4 The Influence of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Context on Appropriate Technology (AT) Selection 239
• 4.5.5.5 The Influence of Appropriate Technology (AT) Selection on Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) and Perceived Usefulness (PU) 240
• 4.5.5.6 The Influence of Perceived Ease of Use (PEU) on Perceived Usefulness (PU) and Behavior Intention to Use (BI) 242
• 4.5.5.7 The Influence of Perceived Usefulness (PU) on Behavior Intention to Use (BI) 243
• 4.6 Implications 244
• 4.6.1 Theoretical Implications 245
• 4.6.2 Managerial Implications 247
• 4.7 Conclusion 252
• 4.7.1 Summary 252
• 4.7.2 Contribution 254
• 4.7.3 Limitation and Future Work 255
• Chapter 5. Conclusion and Implications 257
• 5.1 Summary 257
• 5.2 Implications 260
• 5.3 Research Contributions 263
• 5.4 Research Limitations and Future Research 273
• Bibliography 276
• Appendices 333
• Abstract (Korean) 347
• Acknowledgement 350