Accelerated Digital Transformation of Higher Education in the Wake of COVID-19: A Systematic Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated digital transformation (DT) across various industries, including higher education (HE). In response to the dynamic demands of contemporary society, higher education institutions (HEIs) must swiftly adapt and transform. However, existing research has revealed a prevalent lack of strategic vision regarding DT in HE, often limited to the mere integration of technology. This study employs a systematic literature review (SLR) as a methodological framework to identify and categorize DT challenges and strategies within HE accelerated after the pandemic event. Findings from this SLR highlight four distinct categories of challenges and strategies in DT: Strategic-Administrative, Teaching-Learning, Technical-Technological, and Social-Cultural. Notably, the literature tends to focus more on identifying challenges, revealing an unbalanced emphasis compared to analyzing how HEIs are actively progressing in their DT efforts. Furthermore, there is a significant absence of impact analysis regarding these DT strategies within HE. To address these gaps, recommendations for future research are proposed, including (i) Exploration of strategic processes in HE toward DT, (ii) Empirical analysis of the Digital Maturity of HEIs, and (iii) Assessment of the impact of the strategic responses of HE toward DT. In conclusion, this study underscores the urgency for a more strategic approach to DT in HE, emphasizing the need to shift the focus from technology integration toward holistic, effective, and outcome-driven strategies. These recommendations aim to guide future research toward a more interdisciplinary and comprehensive understanding of DT within the realm of HE.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.076 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".