1. Introduction
The fourth industrial revolution is characterized by the advanced adoption of radical technologies and the co-existence of the virtual and real world [1]. One of the key concepts that the fourth industrial revolution is promoting is the concept of sustainability in various aspects of the modern society. One of such areas is ‘education’. The fourth industrial revolution has been able to achieve this through the adoption of advanced technologies that spur digital transformation. Digital transformation is an evolution of a business process through the use of revolutionary technologies that are customer focused [2,3].
Digital transformation within the education sector involves the usage of new and novel digital technologies that have the potential of bringing unprecedented change within the society, businesses, economies, and other aspects of the social sphere [4,5]. However, there is a paucity of evidence to demonstrate how the digital transformation of the fourth industrial revolution is leading to sustainability within the education sector. This study seeks to bridge this gap by providing empirical evidence on how it has been able to lead sustainability via leading open knowledge. Open knowledge can be defined as knowledge that is readily available to all, to freely modify, redistribute, and share [6,7].
To help achieve this goal, this study considered three research questions:
What is the role of digital transformation in higher education?
What is the impact of digital transformative education techniques on student innovation and performance?
What is the future trajectory of digital transformation in education?
The methodology that was adopted in this study was a mix of a systematic literature review and a bibliometric analysis. The novelty of this study means that research relating to the subject matter is scarce. Hence, the adoption of the methodology is not only appropriate, but is the best-considering this fact. Furthermore, for the systematic review of literature, the adoption of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines and the use of VOSViewer for the bibliometric analysis ensured that the results obtained herein, can be replicated and verified. The scope of this study was limited to studies in South Korea, the United States (US), and the European Union (EU) because these are amongst the regions and countries that have conducted advanced research in this area of study [8].
The structure of this paper includes Section 1 that gives a brief background and the relevance of the study followed by a detailed Section 2. Next, is the Section 3—explaining the process used in the identification of contributions. The Section 4 contains an analysis of the results obtained, its implication, and how it provides answers to the research questions. Section 5 is the conclusion section that summarizes the study.
2. Methodology
The methodology used in this study is qualitative. It entails a mix of a systematic review of literature and a bibliometric analysis. A systematic literature review is a methodology that is suitable when the aim of a study is to synthesize the knowledge in existing studies on a subject matter [9]. This study falls into this category; hence, the adoption of this methodology is right. Furthermore, studies considering the relationship between the digital transformation of the advanced technologies of the fourth industrial revolution, and the higher education system are scarce. Hence, a review of extant literature is the most appropriate method for collecting information. While there are various guidelines for performing a systematic literature review, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline is one of the favorites of researchers.
The PRISMA 2020 guideline is an updated version of the PRISMA 2009 version [10]. It has new guidance that shows the styles for the identification, selection, appraisal, and synthesis of studies [11]. Within this statement, 27 guidelines are recommended for researchers to follow to ensure that systematic literature reviews meet the highest standards. An important consideration for the use of the PRISMA guideline is that it ensures transparency in the process involved in gathering contributions for a systematic literature review [12]. According to Sarkis-Onofre et al. [13], the PRISMA guideline presents an evidence-based approach to ensure transparency and a complete report of the contents of selected materials.
The bibliometric analysis is important for examining and processing the quantitative components of a systematic literature review. From the findings of the systematic literature review, a bibliometric map approach can be used to visualize bibliometric information and results [9]. The bibliometric analysis was used in this study to examine keyword trends relating to each research question. The software VOSViewer was utilized to conduct the bibliometric analysis. This is because according to UIC [14], this software is designed to create visuals for bibliometric relations. The key databases that were searched are SCOPUS and the web of science (SCIE and SSCI). This is because these are some of the most robust databases for conducting research [15,16,17].
3. Results and Analysis
Using the Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethical and Relevant (FINER) framework, the keywords in Table 1 were developed for the first research question (R1). According to Fandino [18], the FINER framework is an important tool for researchers in developing good research questions. This is because for a study to be successful, a good research question needs to have been developed before the study starts. The FINER framework provides a set of steps that represents guides and structure for the development, prioritization, and logical construction of research questions in a study. The systematic literature search in this study was conducted on the third of December 2022. The steps taken in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines are presented in Figure 1, while the selected contributions are presented in Table 2.
A bibliometric analysis was performed on the selected contributions and the results of the keyword analysis are presented in Figure 2.
Using the FINER framework, the keywords in Table 3 were developed for the second research question (R2). The search was conducted on the fourth of December 2022, and the steps taken in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines are presented in Figure 3, while the results of the search are presented in Table 4.
A bibliometric analysis was performed on the selected contributions and the results of the keyword analysis were presented in Figure 4.
Using the FINER framework, the keywords in Table 5 were developed for the third research question (R3). The search was conducted on the sixth of December 2022. The steps taken in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines are presented in Figure 5, while the results of the search are presented in Table 6.
A bibliometric analysis was performed on the selected contributions and the results of the keyword analysis are presented in Figure 6.
4. Discussion
This section provides relevant answers to the research questions this study sought to provide answers to. It examined the results of the systematic review of literature and bibliometric analysis to provide answers to each research question. The results of the Systematic literature review (SLR) in this study relating to the first research question (R1) show that digital transformation is leading to positive changes within higher education. According to Leal et al. [10], it is leading to the development of sustainable curriculums. These curriculums are based on seven key principles, which includes [54]:
(a). Change and transformation.
(b). Life learning and education for all.
(c). Systematic thinking that concentrates on the importance of environmental, economic, social and political sustainability.
(d). Problem solving skill development for a better future.
(e). Critical reflection and thinking.
(f). Partnership for change.
Likewise, Aldowah et al. [21] posits that digitalization is leading to a better tailoring of education to meet the needs of students. The importance of tailoring education to the needs of students is that it helps students overcome their weaknesses, focus on their strengths, breeds innovation, considers the disabilities of students, and ensures that students have the prerequisite foundation to better contribute to the society [25,55,56]. Furthermore, the digital transformation of the higher education system is improving communication between students and their teachers. This is important because good communication is a strong motivating factor for students to succeed in their academic endeavors [57].
The bibliometric analysis of the selected contributions shows the impact of digital transformation of the advanced technologies of the fourth industrial revolution on higher education. It is changing the business model of higher institutions, improving online learning, and leading to the integration of online education into traditional systems of learning. According to Falk & Lenz [58], the integration of enhanced education technology (Edtech) is leading to the development of innovative business models in higher education. This innovative business model helps higher education institutions to remain competitive. Secondly, innovation and technology are improving online learning. This is because [59]:
it makes learning flexible;
it reduces the cost of education compared to the traditional models of education;
it brings diversity to the type of courses available to students;
it propagates better tailoring of education to the needs of students;
it improves accessibility to education.
The digital transformation of the higher education sector is leading to a blended system of learning that includes a mix of both online and offline learning options in higher education. According to Alammary et al. [60], there are three models of blended learning in higher education which are applied on a case-by-case approach and based on the expected results. These models include a low-impact blended model that builds on existing courses by adding extra activities, a medium-impact blended model that substitutes specific activities within existing courses, and a high-impact blended model that builds on a blended course from the scratch. This leads to an expansion of the scope of learning. These results are in-line with the expansive learning theory that emphasizes the improvement of knowledge of individuals based on their collective participation in an activity [55].
Next, the systematic review of literature and bibliometric analysis was used to provide answers to the second research question (R2). The result of the SLR shows that indeed the digital transformation within the higher education system is enhancing the innovativeness and performance of students. This view is supported by Seres et al. [36] and Al-Rahmi et al. [37]. This is because a blended approach of learning improves both the performance and innovativeness of students in higher education [38]. In-addition to improving the performance of students, it also improves self-efficacy in students [61].
Serdyukov [62] posits that the digital transformation of the higher education sector improved the quality of education and reduces the cost of learning. However, it is important that a theoretical foundation for the integration of these technologies is employed to ensure that they deliver on the expected performance. This theoretical approach should be based on systemic research and a sound pedagogy [62]. Another important improvement that the digital transformation of the higher education system is bringing is the development of living labs that are improving the performance of students—most especially in their ability to access scholarships [40]. According to Davidson et al. [63], open labs are very essential in bridging the skills gaps in students, building an inquisitive skill in students and improving students’ learning experience.
The result of the bibliometric analysis shows that the digital transformation of the higher education system is leading to an improvement in the preparation of students for the workplace. Several studies have shown a correlation between higher education and workplace readiness. These include-Castañeda et al. [64] and Vandenbosch [65]. Another study shows that the adoption of the advanced technologies of the fourth industrial revolution in higher education is improving the knowledge of students in higher education and their preparedness for the workplace [66]. This is because the right theoretical knowledge and practical skills needed to perform optimally in the workplace can be provided by a well-structured higher education institution. Another aspect of the impact of the digital transformation of the higher education system is that it is also having a positive impact on the technical capabilities of students. According to Rodrigues et al. [67], it has a positive impact on the social, personal, and professional future of students and their quality of life. The COVID-19 pandemic made the digital transformation of the higher education system even more important. The pandemic highlighted its importance in enhancing innovation in higher education. During the pandemic, in-person studies were impossible. However, due to various technologies and innovations, this issue was overcome, and the capabilities of students (potential employees) were improved, enabling them to prepare well for the workplace [68]. However, more work is needed to ensure that education curriculums are better developed to ensure that the needs of the workplace are properly addressed [68]. The results show that digitalization of the higher education sector brings about digital change that transforms the sector. This is in line with the digital change theory that emphasizes the importance of digitalization on digital change [69].
Finally, the results of the SLR and the bibliometric analysis relating to the third research question (R3) was examined. The results of the SLR show that the digital transformation of the education system will lead to the maturity of the concept of ‘Education 4.0’. Education 4.0 is associated with the transformative change within the education system–through the adoption of critical technologies of the fourth industrial education [70]. Furthermore, technologies such as the Bluetooth Beacon will impact the delivery of services within the higher education system [46]. Bluetooth Beacons are hardware devices used to transmit information between users and are powered by batteries [71]. This device will revolutionize the higher education system because students and their teachers will be able to exchange information seamlessly.
Datafication will lead to better decision making as a result of the advanced analysis of data [46]. Datafication is based on the premise that the activities and socialization of humans can be modeled into data and this data can be processed to make appropriate and better decisions [72]. Another technology that will change the landscape of higher education in the future is artificial intelligence and augmented reality [49,51]. Artificial intelligence involves training machines to develop the intelligent nature of humans and the ability to make decisions independent of humans. The augmented reality involves the enhancement of a view of the natural environment, via the use of technology, to improve the experience of users [72,73]. These two technologies will improve students’ experience and their performance in the future.
Conversely, the bibliometric analysis shows that the future of the digital transformation of the higher education system includes the development of Smart campuses, education 4.0, datafication, and the sustainability of the education sector. Since education 4.0 and datafication have been discussed earlier, only Smart campuses and the sustainability of the education sector will be discussed next. Smart campuses are emerging trends that combine physical infrastructure and Smart technologies together to improve decision making, services, and the sustainability of campuses [74]. According to Min-Allah & Alrashed [74], Smart campuses are the future of the digitalization of the higher education system. Concepts under the Smart campus initiative include smart classrooms, smart microgrid, attendance taking via face recognition/smart cards and an integrated visual, and thermal properties of buildings [74].
The digital transformation of the education sector is leading to the sustainability of education. This is because it is leading to higher education institutions gaining a competitive advantage [75]. Alam [76] posited that artificial intelligence is an enabling factor in the development of Smart campuses. Already, a correlation between the performance of Smart campuses and the digital transformation of higher education has been established earlier. Therefore, it can be concluded that the digital transformation of the higher education system will lead to the sustainability of the education sector. These results are in line with the connectivism theory that emphasizes the changes that digitalization brings to the education sector [8].
5. Conclusions
The main aim of this study is to consider the impact of the digital transformation of the technologies of the fourth industrial revolution on higher education, while considering the innovativeness and performance of students. The overarching research question was divided into three sub-questions to help evaluate it better. The three sub-questions include the following:
What is the role of digital transformation in higher education?
What is the impact of digital transformative education techniques on student innovativeness and performance?
What is the future trajectory of digital transformation in education?
To ensure that these sub-questions are answered appropriately, a systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis methodologies were used. These methodologies were adopted because of the novelty of the research area. Research on the digital transformation of the higher education system is still in its infancy. This makes this research necessary and important. For the systematic literature review, the PRISMA 2020 guidelines were adopted. This was to ensure that the process of selecting contributions was of the highest standards obtainable within the research community and to ensure that the contributions selected were relevant to the study. Conversely, for the bibliometric analysis, the software VOSViewer was used to examine the trends within the keywords of the selected contribution. Herein, the FINER framework was used to develop the keywords relating to each sub-question. The databases that were searched are SCOPUS and the Web of Science (SCIE and SSCI). In all, a total of 35 contributions were considered.
The results relating to the first research question show that the digital transformation of the higher education sector is leading to the development of sustainable curriculums. These are curriculums that buttress the main principles of sustainability in all areas of life. These curriculums ensure that the issue of sustainability takes center stage in decision making in businesses and in the society. Moreover, the results show that the digital transformation of the higher education system is ensuring that education curriculums are better tailored to the needs of students. This approach ensures that students have the right skills and knowledge to function optimally within the society and be able to contribute meaningfully to the development of their communities. The traditional approach to curriculum development uses a one size fits all approach. However, this new approach considers the unique requirement of each student—studying in a particular field of study. This methodology ensures that higher education bridges the skills and knowledge gaps students may have. Furthermore, the digital transformation of the higher education systems is leading to the development of new innovative business models within the higher education section. This is making higher education institutions develop a competitive advantage over their peers and makes higher education institutions sustainable. Furthermore, it is making higher education institutions deliver their services both online and offline to reach more students.
The results of this study, regarding the second research question, show that the digital transformation of the higher education system leads to the enhancement of innovation and an improvement in the performance of students. This is because these advanced technologies are providing students with more tailored resources that guarantee an improvement in the delivery of education services. This ensures that knowledge is transferred seamlessly. Furthermore, digital tools such as the open lab (used by some higher institutions) are improving the performance of students. These labs bridge the skills gaps in students, build inquisitive skills in students, and improve their learning experience. In addition, they provide students with the right skills and knowledge to excel in the workplace. This is because the proper use of technology makes it possible for students to develop practical skills that would be useful in the workplace.
Finally, the results relating to the third research question show that the future of the digital transformation of the higher education sector will be the advancement of the concept of ‘Education 4.0’. This implies the use of the advanced technologies of the fourth industrial revolution within the higher education sector. In addition, the advanced use of the Bluetooth Beacon by students and faculties is the future of this innovation. This will aid the ease of transfer of technology and the openness of knowledge. The results also show that in the future, AI and AR will play a major role in reforming higher education across the globe. This is because more innovative approaches to learning will be developed. These include the development and implementation of virtual learning that improves the understanding of students and will ensure everyone has access to education regardless of where they are located (borderless education). In addition, it will lead to the development of advanced Smart campuses globally.
It is important that to enhance the performance of educational institution in the fourth industrial revolution. The digital transformative power of advanced technologies must be adopted to make education SMART. Furthermore, the adoption of these technologies will ensure that people all across the world can have access to education regardless of where they live. Finally, in the era of the knowledge economy, the adoption of the digital transformation of the education sector can guarantee open knowledge/innovation via making information accessible. This study has been able to provide empirical evidence on how education can be tailored and improved using the digital transformative power of the technologies of the fourth industrial revolution to enhance innovation in students and improve national innovation systems to drive sustainable development.
Limitation of Study and Future Clues
A limitation of this study is the paucity of contributions that have studied the digital transformation of the higher education system in countries across the world—mainly in developing and least developed countries. This makes it difficult to compare the impact of the innovation across a broad spectrum of countries. In addition, there is a paucity of quantitative studies on the subject matter. Furthermore, the negative impact of the digital transformation of education was not considered within this study. These issues make it difficult to conduct studies to check a variety of factors that may affect the relationship between the digital transformation of the technologies of the fourth industrial revolution and aspects of higher education. However, these limitations did not affect this study negatively. The results of this study are not only robust, but also bring new insight into the relationship considered. It will be important for future studies to examine the relationship between the digital transformation of the higher education system while considering a multi-country analysis to determine the various factors that come into place. Furthermore, studies that utilize quantitative analysis and consider the negative effect of digitalization on education should also be explored.
Conceptualization, T.S.; methodology, T.S.; software, T.S.; validation, T.S. and E.K.; formal analysis, T.S.; investigation, T.S.; resources, T.S. and E.K.; data curation, T.S. and E.K.; writing—original draft preparation, T.S.; writing—review and editing, T.S.; visualization, T.S.; supervision, E.K.; project administration, T.S.; funding acquisition, E.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Facet analysis using FINER framework for the first research question.
| Feasibility | Interesting | Novel | Ethical | Relevant | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Korea | AND | Higher education | AND | Education models | AND | Open knowledge | AND | Digital transformation |
| OR | ||||||||
| US | ||||||||
| OR | ||||||||
| EU |
Selected studies relating to the first research question.
| S/No | Year of Publication | Author(s) | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2018 | Leal Filho et al. [ |
Digital transformation is leading to the sustainability of curriculums within higher education systems |
| 2 | 2018 | Lee [ |
Knowledge sharing enhanced by technology is building the individual creativity of students in higher education |
| 3 | 2019 | Aldowah et al. [ |
In higher education, Educational data mining (EDM) and Learning analytics (LA) are improving the ability of institutions to tailor education to the needs of students |
| 4 | 2019 | Kim et al. [ |
For the impact of digitalization in higher education to be optimized, students must improve their skills and engagement with digital tools |
| 5 | 2019 | Torres Kompen et al. [ |
The adoption of Web 2.0 is motivating students more and helping them to participate better in their learning process |
| 6 | 2019 | Santos et al. [ |
Communication between students and teachers in higher education institutions is greatly improved through digitalization that enhances the publication of research materials and interpersonal communication between these groups |
| 7 | 2019 | Holmes et al. [ |
Some of the benefits of AI in higher education include – adaptive learning, computer-based learning, and the development of intelligent tutoring system |
| 8 | 2020 | Agasisti et al. [ |
Sustainability within the education sector is being led by the digital transformative power of the adoption of innovation within the higher education sector |
| 9 | 2020 | Crawford et al. [ |
Knowledge-sharing amongst institutions is improved via digitalization |
| 10 | 2020 | Rof et al. [ |
The digital transformation of modern technologies is leading to the development of new business models that are enhancing innovation within the higher education sector |
| 11 | 2020 | Yureva et al. [ |
While the digital transformative power of innovation within the higher education is leading to positive change, the inability of teaching professionals to use these technologies properly, limits the impact recorded |
| 12 | 2021 | Alenezi [ |
For higher education to be relevant in the fourth industrial revolution, the realization of the digital transformative power of advanced technologies is a prerequisite |
| 13 | 2021 | García-Peñalvo [ |
To ensure inclusiveness, and participatory learning, universities need to adopt and use digitalization properly |
| 14 | 2021 | Han & Sa [ |
The Technology acceptance model (TAM) is a model of education brought about by digital transformation. Its impact can only be optimized through making online classes easy - to improve the participation of students |
| 15 | 2021 | Ngafeeson [ |
The digital strategy of the Global Campus (online campus) is championing a digital transformation in higher education that meets the high standards of traditional campuses and the needs of students |
| 16 | 2022 | Rof et al. [ |
The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of the digital transformative power of technology in higher education. This led to an advancement of digital based education |
| 17 | 2022 | Santos-Hermosa & Atenas [ |
Open education (OE), Open access (OA), and Open science (OSC) are enhancing open knowledge in higher education |
Facet analysis using FINER framework for the second research question.
| Feasibility | Interesting | Novel | Ethical | Relevant | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Korea | AND | Higher education | AND | Innovation | AND | Performance | AND | Digital transformation |
| OR | ||||||||
| US | ||||||||
| OR | ||||||||
| EU |
Selected studies relating to the second research question.
| S/No | Year of Publication | Author(s) | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2018 | Seres et al. [ |
While the digitalization of the higher education system is expensive, it is enhancing innovation in students and will benefit higher institutions in the long run |
| 2 | 2019 | Al-Rahmi et al. [ |
The use of E-learning systems in higher education is improving the performance of students |
| 3 | 2019 | Castro [ |
A blended approach to learning in higher education is helping higher education institutions developed a tailored approach to learning for students and makes it possible for students to learn at their own pace. This leads to an improvement in out of class activities and feedback |
| 4 | 2019 | Martin & Tapp [ |
Students in higher education agree that digitalization of education tools improves their performance |
| 5 | 2019 | Purcell et al. [ |
Living labs have been very instrumental in helping to improve the performance of higher education students in accessing scholarship |
| 6 | 2020 | Oke & Fernandes [ |
The digital transformation of the fourth industrial revolution has the potential of improving the innovativeness of students and preparing them for the workplace |
| 7 | 2021 | Galynska et al. [ |
The innovativeness and the need to study more in higher education students are enhanced by the use of advanced technologies in teaching |
Facet analysis using FINER framework for the third research question.
| Feasibility | Interesting | Novel | Ethical | Relevant | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Korea | AND | Higher education | AND | Future | AND | Performance | AND | Digital transformation |
| OR | ||||||||
| US | ||||||||
| OR | ||||||||
| EU |
Selected contribution relating to the third research question.
| S/No | Year of Publication | Author(s) | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2019 | Almeida & Simoes [ |
The advancement in the digital technology of the fourth industrial revolution is leading to the development of the concept of education 4.0 and the role of gamification in education will increase |
| 2 | 2019 | Griffiths et al. [ |
In the future, the use of Bluetooth Beacon will increase, and this will improve students’ learning experience and effectiveness |
| 3 | 2019 | Hrastinski [ |
The future of higher education is a combination of face-face learning and the use of online-digital tools known as blended learning |
| 4 | 2019 | Jarke & Breiter [ |
Datafication will be very instrumental in decision making in higher education in the future and may promote a new type of digital divide |
| 5 | 2019 | Leal Filho et al. [ |
Digital transformation of advanced technologies is already having an impact on the sustainability of education, but is set to improve in the future |
| 6 | 2019 | Ruxandra [ |
The future of the digital transformation within the higher education sector will be an integration of the power of the technology to ensure an enhancement of creative thinking, and innovativeness in students |
| 7 | 2019 | Xu et al. [ |
Artificial intelligence will continue to impact higher education in medicine to improve the performance and innovativeness of students |
| 8 | 2019 | Zawacki-Richter et al. [ |
In the future, the use of artificial intelligence in higher education will be the backbone of education |
| 9 | 2020 | Abad-Segura et al. [ |
The advanced use of Augmented Reality in higher education is the future of the digital transformation of the technology |
| 10 | 2020 | Rosenbusch [ |
While the adoption of digital tools in higher education for teaching ‘human resource development’ is still in its infancy, in future, it is projected that its adoption will increase, and it will improve ‘human resource development’ |
| 11 | 2022 | Díaz-García et al. [ |
The digital transformation of the higher education system leads to the support of knowledge creation and competency development of students - through the adoption of advanced technologies of the fourth industrial revolution |
References
1. Pitsis, T.S.; Beckman, S.L.; Steinert, M.; Oviedo, L.; Maisch, B. Designing the Future: Strategy, Design, and the 4th Industrial Revolution—An Introduction to the Special Issue. Calif. Manag. Rev.; 2020; 62, pp. 5-11. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0008125620907163]
2. Kim, S.; Choi, B.; Lew, Y. Where Is the Age of Digitalization Heading? The Meaning, Characteristics, and Implications of Contemporary Digital Transformation. Sustainability; 2021; 13, 8909. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13168909]
3. Verhoef, P.C.; Broekhuizen, T.; Bart, Y.; Bhattacharya, A.; Qi Dong, J.; Fabian, N.; Haenlein, M. Digital Transformation: A Multidisciplinary Reflection and Research Agenda. J. Bus. Res.; 2021; 122, pp. 889-901. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022]
4. Demartini, C.G.; Benussi, L.; Gatteschi, V.; Renga, F. Education and Digital Transformation: The “Riconnessioni” Project. IEEE Access; 2020; 8, pp. 186233-186256. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3018189]
5. Bilyalova, A.A.; Salimova, D.A.; Zelenina, T.I. Digital Transformation in Education. Lect. Notes Netw. Syst.; 2020; 78, pp. 265-276. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22493-6_24/COVER]
6. Ji, S.; Pan, S.; Cambria, E.; Marttinen, P.; Yu, P.S. A Survey on Knowledge Graphs: Representation, Acquisition, and Applications. IEEE Trans. Neural. Netw. Learn Syst.; 2022; 33, pp. 494-514. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2021.3070843] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33900922]
7. Hogan, A.; Blomqvist, E.; Cochez, M.; D’Amato, C.; Melo, G.d.; Gutierrez, C.; Kirrane, S.; Gayo, J.E.L.; Navigli, R.; Neumaier, S. et al. Knowledge Graphs. ACM Comput. Surv. (CSUR); 2021; 54, pp. 1-37. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3447772]
8. Abad-Segura, E.; González-Zamar, M.D.; Infante-Moro, J.C.; García, G.R. Sustainable Management of Digital Transformation in Higher Education: Global Research Trends. Sustainability; 2020; 12, 2107. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12052107]
9. Linnenluecke, M.K.; Marrone, M.; Singh, A.K. Conducting Systematic Literature Reviews and Bibliometric Analyses. Aust. J. Manag.; 2020; 45, pp. 175-194. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0312896219877678]
10. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Moher, D. Updating Guidance for Reporting Systematic Reviews: Development of the PRISMA 2020 Statement. J. Clin. Epidemiol.; 2021; 134, pp. 103-112. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.003]
11. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E. et al. The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. Rev. Esp. Cardiol. (Engl. Ed.); 2021; 74, pp. 790-799. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.recesp.2021.06.016]
12. Page, M.J.; Moher, D. Evaluations of the Uptake and Impact of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and Extensions: A Scoping Review. Syst. Rev.; 2017; 6, pp. 1-14. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/S13643-017-0663-8]
13. Sarkis-Onofre, R.; Catalá-López, F.; Aromataris, E.; Lockwood, C. How to Properly Use the PRISMA Statement. Syst. Rev.; 2021; 10, pp. 1-3. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01671-z]
14. UIC. Bibliometrics with VOSViewer—Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization—Subject and Course Guides at University of Illinois at Chicago; UIC: North Wollongong, NSW, Australia, Available online: https://researchguides.uic.edu/c.php?g=1233392&p=9025986 (accessed on 15 November 2022).
15. Singh, V.K.; Singh, P.; Karmakar, M.; Leta, J.; Mayr, P. The Journal Coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A Comparative Analysis. Scientometrics; 2021; 126, pp. 5113-5142. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03948-5]
16. Gusenbauer, M.; Haddaway, N.R. Which Academic Search Systems Are Suitable for Systematic Reviews or Meta-Analyses? Evaluating Retrieval Qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 Other Resources. Res. Synth. Methods; 2020; 11, pp. 181-217. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378]
17. Choi, S.; Choi, J. Effects of the Teach-Back Method among Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Support. Care Cancer; 2021; 29, pp. 7259-7268. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06445-w]
18. Fandino, W. Formulating a Good Research Question: Pearls and Pitfalls. Indian J. Anaesth.; 2019; 63, 611. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4103/ija.IJA_198_19]
19. Leal Filho, W.; Raath, S.; Lazzarini, B.; Vargas, V.R.; de Souza, L.; Anholon, R.; Quelhas, O.L.G.; Haddad, R.; Klavins, M.; Orlovic, V.L. The Role of Transformation in Learning and Education for Sustainability. J. Clean. Prod.; 2018; 199, pp. 286-295. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.017]
20. Lee, J. The Effects of Knowledge Sharing on Individual Creativity in Higher Education Institutions: Socio-Technical View. Adm. Sci.; 2018; 8, 21. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/admsci8020021]
21. Aldowah, H.; Al-Samarraie, H.; Fauzy, W.M. Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics for 21st Century Higher Education: A Review and Synthesis. Telemat. Inform.; 2019; 37, pp. 13-49. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.TELE.2019.01.007]
22. Kim, H.J.; Hong, A.J.; Song, H.D. The Roles of Academic Engagement and Digital Readiness in Students’ Achievements in University e-Learning Environments. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ.; 2019; 16, pp. 1-18. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0152-3]
23. Torres Kompen, R.; Edirisingha, P.; Canaleta, X.; Alsina, M.; Monguet, J.M. Personal Learning Environments Based on Web 2.0 Services in Higher Education. Telemat. Inform.; 2019; 38, pp. 194-206. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.10.003]
24. Santos, H.; Batista, J.; Marques, R.P. Digital Transformation in Higher Education: The Use of Communication Technologies by Students. Procedia Comput. Sci.; 2019; 164, pp. 123-130. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.12.163]
25. Holmes, W.; Bialik, M.; Fadel, C. Artificial Intelligence in Education Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning; The Center for Curriculum Redesign: Boston, MA, USA, 2019.
26. Agasisti, T.; Frattini, F.; Soncin, M. Digital Innovation in Times of Emergency: Reactions from a School of Management in Italy. Sustainability; 2020; 12, 10312. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su122410312]
27. Crawford, J.; Butler-Henderson, K.; Rudolph, J.; Malkawi, B.; Glowatz, M.; Burton, R.; Magni, P.; Lam, S. COVID-19: 20 Countries’ Higher Education Intra-Period Digital Pedagogy Responses. J. Appl. Learn. Teach.; 2020; 3, pp. 1-20. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2020.3.1.7]
28. Rof, A.; Bikfalvi, A.; Marquès, P. Digital Transformation for Business Model Innovation in Higher Education: Overcoming the Tensions. Sustainability; 2020; 12, 4980. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12124980]
29. Yureva, O.v.; Burganova, L.A.; Kukushkina, O.Y.; Myagkov, G.P.; Syradoev, D.v. Digital Transformation and Its Risks in Higher Education: Students’ and Teachers’ Attitude. Univers. J. Educ. Res.; 2020; 8, pp. 5965-5971. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.082232]
30. Alenezi, M. Deep Dive into Digital Transformation in Higher Education Institutions. Educ. Sci.; 2021; 11, 770. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci11120770]
31. García-Peñalvo, F.J. Avoiding the Dark Side of Digital Transformation in Teaching. An Institutional Reference Framework for ELearning in Higher Education. Sustainability; 2021; 13, 2023. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13042023]
32. Han, J.H.; Sa, H.J. Acceptance of and Satisfaction with Online Educational Classes through the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM): The COVID-19 Situation in Korea. Asia Pac. Educ. Rev.; 2022; 23, pp. 403-415. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12564-021-09716-7]
33. Ngafeeson, M.N. Northern Michigan University Online Campus: A Case of Digital Transformation in Higher Education. J. Inf. Technol. Teach. Cases; 2021; 12, pp. 230-243. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20438869211056950]
34. Rof, A.; Bikfalvi, A.; Marques, P. Pandemic-Accelerated Digital Transformation of a Born Digital Higher Education Institution on JSTOR. Educ. Technol. Soc.; 2022; 25, pp. 124-141.
35. Santos-Hermosa, G.; Atenas, J. Building Capacities in Open Knowledge: Recommendations for Library and Information Science Professionals and Schools. Front. Educ.; 2022; 7, 470. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.866049]
36. Seres, L.; Pavlicevic, V.; Tumbas, P. Digital Transformation of Higher Education: Competing on Analytics. Proceedings of the 12th International Technology, Education and Development Conference; Valencia, Spain, 5–7 March 2018; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.21125/inted.2018.2348]
37. Al-Rahmi, W.M.; Yahaya, N.; Aldraiweesh, A.A.; Alamri, M.M.; Aljarboa, N.A.; Alturki, U.; Aljeraiwi, A.A. Integrating Technology Acceptance Model with Innovation Diffusion Theory: An Empirical Investigation on Students’ Intention to Use E-Learning Systems. IEEE Access; 2019; 7, pp. 26797-26809. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2899368]
38. Castro, R. Blended Learning in Higher Education: Trends and Capabilities. Educ. Inf. Technol.; 2019; 24, pp. 2523-2546. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09886-3]
39. Martin, L.; Tapp, D. Teaching with Teams: An Introduction to Teaching an Undergraduate Law Module Using Microsoft Teams. Innov. Pract. High. Educ.; 2019; 3, pp. 58-66.
40. Purcell, W.M.; Henriksen, H.; Spengler, J.D. Universities as the Engine of Transformational Sustainability toward Delivering the Sustainable Development Goals: “Living Labs” for Sustainability. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ.; 2019; 20, pp. 1343-1357. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-02-2019-0103]
41. Oke, A.; Fernandes, F.A.P. Innovations in Teaching and Learning: Exploring the Perceptions of the Education Sector on the 4th Industrial Revolution (4IR). J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex.; 2020; 6, 31. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6020031]
42. Galynska, O.; Shkoliar, N.; Dziubata, Z.; Kravets, S.; Levchyk, N. Innovative Teaching Technologies as a Way to Increase Students’ Competitiveness. Int. J. Educ. Inf. Technol.; 2021; 15, pp. 215-226. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.46300/9109.2021.15.22]
43. Almeida, F.; Simoes, J. The Role of Serious Games, Gamification and Industry 4.0 Tools in the Education 4.0 Paradigm. Contemp. Educ. Technol.; 2019; 10, pp. 120-136. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.30935/cet.554469]
44. Griffiths, S.; Wong, M.S.; Kwok, C.Y.T.; Kam, R.; Lam, S.C.; Yang, L.; Yip, T.L.; Heo, J.; Chan, B.S.B.; Xiong, G. et al. Exploring Bluetooth Beacon Use Cases in Teaching and Learning: Increasing the Sustainability of Physical Learning Spaces. Sustainability; 2019; 11, 4005. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su11154005]
45. Hrastinski, S. What Do We Mean by Blended Learning?. Tech. Trends; 2019; 63, pp. 564-569. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00375-5]
46. Jarke, J.; Breiter, A. Editorial: The Datafication of Education. Learn. Media Technol.; 2019; 44, pp. 1-6. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1573833]
47. Leal Filho, W.; Shiel, C.; Paço, A.; Mifsud, M.; Ávila, L.V.; Brandli, L.L.; Molthan-Hill, P.; Pace, P.; Azeiteiro, U.M.; Vargas, V.R. et al. Sustainable Development Goals and Sustainability Teaching at Universities: Falling behind or Getting Ahead of the Pack?. J. Clean. Prod.; 2019; 232, pp. 285-294. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.309]
48. Ruxandra, B. Impact of Digitalization on Education in the Knowledge Economy. Manag. Dyn. Knowl. Econ.; 2019; 7, pp. 367-380. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.25019/MDKE/7.3.06]
49. Xu, J.; Yang, P.; Xue, S.; Sharma, B.; Sanchez-Martin, M.; Wang, F.; Beaty, K.A.; Dehan, E.; Parikh, B. Translating Cancer Genomics into Precision Medicine with Artificial Intelligence: Applications, Challenges and Future Perspectives. Hum. Genet.; 2019; 138, pp. 109-124. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00439-019-01970-5]
50. Zawacki-Richter, O.; Marín, V.I.; Bond, M.; Gouverneur, F. Systematic Review of Research on Artificial Intelligence Applications in Higher Education—Where Are the Educators?. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ.; 2019; 16, pp. 1-27. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0]
51. Abad-Segura, E.; González-Zamar, M.D.; Luque-de la Rosa, A.; Cevallos, M.B.M. Sustainability of Educational Technologies: An Approach to Augmented Reality Research. Sustainability; 2020; 12, 4091. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12104091]
52. Rosenbusch, K. Technology Intervention: Rethinking the Role of Education and Faculty in the Transformative Digital Environment. Adv. Dev. Hum. Resour.; 2020; 22, pp. 87-101. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1523422319886297]
53. Díaz-García, V.; Montero-Navarro, A.; Rodríguez-Sánchez, J.-L.; Gallego-Losada, R. Digitalization and Digital Transformation in Higher Education: A Bibliometric Analysis. Front. Psychol.; 2022; 13, 7718. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1081595]
54. Scott, R.H. Sustainable Curriculum, Sustainable University. eCULTURE; 2009; 2, 15.
55. Engeström, Y.; Pyörälä, E. Using Activity Theory to Transform Medical Work and Learning. Med. Teach.; 2020; 43, pp. 7-13. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1795105]
56. Tenney School. Tailored Learning: Improving Your Child’s Academic Success—Tenney School; Tenney School: Houston, TX, USA, Available online: https://tenneyschool.com/tailored-learning-improving-childs-academic-success/ (accessed on 10 December 2022).
57. Asrar, Z.; Tariq, N.; Rashid, H. The Impact of Communication Between Teachers and Students: A Case Study of the Faculty of Management Sciences, University of Karachi, Pakistan. Eur. Sci. J. ESJ; 2018; 14, 32. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2018.v14n16p32]
58. Falk, M.; Lenz, S. Innovative Business Models for Higher Education: An Exploratory Analysis on Education Technology Start-Ups in Selected Countries. Innov. Bus. Model. High. Educ.; 2021; 1, pp. 1-17.
59. Josep, G. 5 Reasons Why Online Learning is the Future of Education in 2022. Education.com. Available online: https://www.educations.com/articles-and-advice/5-reasons-online-learning-is-future-of-education-17146 (accessed on 10 December 2022).
60. Alammary, A.; Sheard, J.; Carbone, A. Blended Learning in Higher Education: Three Different Design Approaches. Australas. J. Educ. Technol.; 2014; 30, pp. 440-454. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.14742/ajet.693]
61. Harris, J.L.; Al-Bataineh, M.T.; Al-Bataineh, A. One to One Technology and Its Effect on Student Academic Achievement and Motivation. Contemp. Educ. Technol.; 2016; 7, pp. 368-381.
62. Serdyukov, P. Innovation in Education: What Works, What Doesn’t, and What to Do about It?. J. Res. Innov. Teach. Learn.; 2017; 10, pp. 4-33. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-10-2016-0007]
63. Davidson, A.-L.; Harlap, A.; Bhuiyan, N. A Living Lab Approach to Prepare Students to Be Confident Innovators. Open Ed. J.; 2022; 68. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4000/interventionseconomiques.19045]
64. Castañeda, J.v.; Bronfman, N.C.; Cisternas, P.C.; Repetto, P.B. Understanding the Culture of Natural Disaster Preparedness: Exploring the Effect of Experience and Sociodemographic Predictors. Nat. Hazards; 2020; 103, pp. 1881-1904. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-04060-2]
65. Vandenbosch, B. Connecting Higher Education to Workplace Readiness—University Business; 1, Indiana, University Business. Available online: https://universitybusiness.com/connecting-higher-education-to-workplace-readiness/ (accessed on 10 December 2022).
66. Al-Maskari, A.; Al Riyami, T.; Ghnimi, S. Factors Affecting Students’ Preparedness for the Fourth Industrial Revolution in Higher Education Institutions. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ.; 2022; ahead-of-print [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-05-2022-0169]
67. Rodrigues, A.L.; Cerdeira, L.; De, M.; Machado-Taylor, L.; Alves, H.; Guillen-Gamez, D.; Toledo, S.V.; Latorre Cosculluela, C. Technological Skills in Higher Education-Different Needs and Different Uses. Educ. Sci.; 2021; 11, 326. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070326]
68. Krishnamoorthy, R.; Keating, K. Education Crisis, Workforce Preparedness, and COVID-19: Reflections and Recommendations. Am. J. Econ. Sociol.; 2021; 80, 253. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajes.12376] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34230670]
69. Tratkowska, K. Digital Transformation: Theoretical Backgrounds of Digital Change. Nauk. O Zarz.; 2019; 24, pp. 32-37. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15611/ms.2019.4.05]
70. Kadiyono, A.L.; Sulistiobudi, R.A.; Haris, I.; Wahab, M.K.A.; Ramdani, I.; Purwanto, A.; Mufid, A.; Muqtada, M.R.; Gufron, M.; Nuryansah, M. et al. Develop Leadership Style Model for Indonesian Teachers Performance in Education 4.0 Era. Syst. Rev. Pharm.; 2020; 11, pp. 363-373. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.31838/SRP.2020.9.52]
71. Alzoubi, H.M.; Alshurideh, M.; Ghazal, T.M. Integrating BLE Beacon Technology with Intelligent Information Systems IIS for Operations’ Performance: A Managerial Perspective. The International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Computer Vision; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 527-538. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76346-6_48]
72. Sadowski, J. When Data Is Capital: Datafication, Accumulation, and Extraction. Big Data Soc.; 2019; 6, 2053951718820549. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2053951718820549]
73. Cope, B.; Kalantzis, M.; Searsmith, D. Artificial Intelligence for Education: Knowledge and Its Assessment in AI-Enabled Learning Ecologies. Educ. Philos. Theory; 2020; 53, pp. 1229-1245. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1728732]
74. Min-Allah, N.; Alrashed, S. Smart Campus—A Sketch. Sustain. Cities Soc.; 2020; 59, 102231. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102231] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32395421]
75. Mohamed Hashim, M.A.; Tlemsani, I.; Duncan Matthews, R. A Sustainable University: Digital Transformation and Beyond. Educ. Inf. Technol.; 2022; 27, pp. 8961-8996. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10968-y] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35340534]
76. Alam, A. Employing Adaptive Learning and Intelligent Tutoring Robots for Virtual Classrooms and Smart Campuses: Reforming Education in the Age of Artificial Intelligence; Springer: Singapore, 2022; pp. 395-406. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2980-9_32]
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Kim, Euiseok 2
1 Science & Technology Knowledge Research Institute, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Republic of Korea
2 School of Business and Technology Management, Graduate Program for Innovation &Technology Management, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Daejeon 34141, Republic of Korea