TECHNOLOGY-BASED TEACHING IN HIGHER EDUCATION IN SOUTH AFRICA: NAVIGATING THE POST-COVID LANDSCAPE (A Systematic Review)

Objective of the study

The objective of this study is to review the impact of technology-based teaching in higher education in South Africa: navigating the post-COVID landscape.

Statement of the research problem

According to Bozalek (2011), Technology-Based Teaching (TBT) has significant potential to transform teaching and learning in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) when adequately implemented and supported. TBT enhances curriculum flexibility through blended and fully online programs, fostering dynamic and interactive learning experiences. However, many HEIs in developing regions continue to face persistent barriers that impede effective TBT deployment. These include limited digital infrastructure, socio-economic constraints, resistance to technological adoption, and competing institutional priorities. Despite its growing relevance in the post-COVID-19 era, several institutions still regard TBT as a supplementary or non-essential component of education. This perception is largely driven by limited funding, ageing infrastructure, and insufficient technical support, leading institutions to prioritise traditional academic needs over technological innovation (Guangul et al., 2020; World Health Organization, 2020). Consequently, TBT is often treated as an optional enhancement rather than a core pedagogical tool, resulting in underutilisation and reduced impact on academic development. The marginalisation of TBT is further reinforced by its limited representation within academic development programmes, which predominantly focus on pedagogy, curriculum design, and assessment, while offering minimal guidance on integrating digital tools into teaching practices. As a result, educators often lack the skills, confidence, and readiness required to implement TBT effectively, which negatively affects student engagement, participation, and learning outcomes (Huang et al., 2020; Guangul et al., 2020). Moreover, the abrupt shift to online platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic exposed disparities in digital access and technological literacy among both students and staff, highlighting systemic inequalities that must be addressed to realise TBT’s full potential (Mpungose, 2020; Teräs et al., 2020). Addressing these limitations requires a strategic shift that recognises TBT as a central pillar of academic practice. Strengthening institutional investment in digital infrastructure, expanding access to learning technologies, and providing comprehensive professional development opportunities for educators are critical steps to ensure the effective adoption of TBT. By prioritising technology integration alongside pedagogical and curriculum reforms, HEIs can fully harness TBT to enhance teaching and learning, improve student outcomes, and bridge the digital divide in the post-pandemic era (Adarkwah, 2021; García-Morales et al., 2021).

Transformative role of TBT in the development

The sustainability of higher education institutions increasingly depends on their ability to embrace digital transformation and innovative teaching approaches that respond to evolving educational and societal needs. Technology-based teaching (TBT) has become a key enabler of flexible, learner-centered education by supporting virtual learning environments that allow students to access educational resources, engage in collaborative learning, and participate in learning activities regardless of time and location. These developments demonstrate TBT's capacity to expand access to higher education while enhancing learning experiences through greater flexibility, collaboration, and innovation (Leal Filho et al., 2018). Technology-based teaching (TBT), including mobile learning, has emerged as a flexible and inclusive approach that supports non-traditional learners by reducing dependence on fixed schedules and physical classroom attendance. This approach enables higher education institutions to address challenges such as geographic isolation, dispersed student populations, and limited educational resources while ensuring continuity of teaching and learning (Guangul et al., 2020). Futhermore, mobile TBT enhances flexibility by reducing reliance on fixed schedules and physical learning spaces, thereby enabling higher education institutions to address challenges associated with geographic isolation, dispersed enrolments, and limited educational resources. Collectively, these developments demonstrate the transformative role of TBT in fostering innovative, inclusive, and responsive higher education systems that support sustainable teaching and learning practices (Leal Filho et al., 2018; Sousa & Rocha, 2019).

What do countries focus on when they invest in education TBT?

While the role of Technology-Based Teaching (TBT) in higher education (HE) remains debated, nearly all countries have invested in TBT to some extent (Hwa, 2018). A review of one country from each Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) region illustrates varying interpretations and implementations of TBT within national HE systems (Falloon, 2020). Despite widespread investment, few countries systematically evaluate whether TBT initiatives are effective, inclusive, equitable, economically efficient, or free from adverse social impacts (Falloon, 2020). Often, reporting emphasises infrastructure development rather than demonstrable improvements in learning outcomes (Falloon, 2020). In some cases, TBT aligns with broader governmental strategies; in others, it functions as a symbolic or modernising measure, sometimes imitating foreign models or prioritising technology as an end in itself (Dole et al., 2016). Kofi Annan has underscored the importance of HEIs in Africa’s development, highlighting their role in building local expertise, solving societal problems, promoting governance, and upholding human rights (Chu et al., 2021). Countries such as Finland and South Korea exemplify the link between robust HE systems and economic development, reinforcing HE’s role as a driver of long-term societal and economic growth (García-Morales et al., 2021). HE aims to cultivate knowledge, skills, and attitudes applicable across all life domains rather than a narrow educational scope (McKeown et al., 2002). McKeown et al. (2002) describe HE as a transformative social process that equips individuals with the values and capabilities necessary for personal and communal well-being. Similarly, Djalilova (2023) highlights HE’s role in fostering integrity, diligence, and a positive identity. The vitality and economic competitiveness of nations correlate closely with the education level of citizens and workforce, positioning HE as foundational for human capital development and socio-economic progress (Sousa & Rocha, 2019).

Across Africa, HE expansion and enrolment growth have been notable, yet gross enrolment remains among the lowest globally, at roughly 5%, despite incremental gains over the past four decades (O’Sullivan et al., 2016). This reflects a persistent mismatch between educational outputs and the demands of knowledge societies. Economic crises in the 1980s and declining public investment exacerbated challenges, resulting in overcrowded campuses, inadequate infrastructure, and limited access to global knowledge networks. These issues are compounded by the increasing diversity in student populations, types of HEIs, and disciplinary offerings, resulting in educational experiences that are often inequitable, inaccessible, and misaligned with societal needs (Jantjies & Joy, 2017). Selwyn (2010) observes that African HEIs face unprecedented pressures, struggling to meet educational, research, and community expectations amid socio-political instability, economic constraints, and globalisation. Historically, donor support has prioritised primary and secondary education, overlooking HE’s capacity to drive economic growth and poverty reduction. Additional challenges include inconsistent education policies, political interference, lecturer shortages, ineffective implementation of TBT, rigid pedagogy, high tuition costs, administrative inefficiencies, and weak institutional partnerships. Recognising these multifaceted obstacles is critical for designing policies and strategies that enable meaningful HE transformation. Accordingly, this chapter adopts a holistic approach, analogous to the distinction between generalists and specialists, by addressing HE challenges from multiple perspectives and proposing integrated, contextually responsive solutions (Hwa, 2018; Falloon, 2020).

Emergence of TBT as a solution to educational transformation

Education remains one of the sectors where the lack of Technology-Based Teaching (TBT) implementation is most evident, with socio-economic disparities shaping access and outcomes, particularly between public and private HEIs (O’Sullivan et al., 2016; Jantjies & Joy, 2017). In South Africa, the pandemic disproportionately affected HEIs within an already unequal system, exposing the uneven distribution of TBT resources (O’Sullivan et al., 2016). Public institutions often rely on government-driven Internet rollouts; however, learners face barriers, including limited high-speed Internet access, unreliable electricity in rural areas, and language constraints, as most online content is in English, despite South Africa having 11 official languages (Mpungose, 2020; Mosehlana, 2018; Jantjies & Joy, 2017). First-time Internet users struggle to acquire digital literacy without support in their home language, underscoring the need for contextually appropriate TBT (Mosehlana, 2018). The link between education and technological innovation is central to HE transformation (Hirsh-Pasek et al., 2022). TBT facilitates policy evaluation and rapid implementation through systems such as unique student identifiers, enhancing operational efficiency and professional teacher development (Huang et al., 2020; Mosehlana, 2018; Wills & Alexander, 2012). Audio-visual content, combined with workbooks, supports dynamic pedagogy; however, TBT adoption remains uneven due to infrastructure gaps, teacher preparedness, socio-economic factors, and national income levels (Mpungose, 2020; Mosehlana, 2018). Large-scale classroom integration is rare, and the costs of TBT are often underestimated (O’Sullivan et al., 2016). TBT should be leveraged strategically, supporting rather than substituting human interaction. Evidence-based decisions are critical to ensure TBT effectiveness and sustainability, particularly for marginalised groups (Müller & Schurr, 2016; Czarniawska & Hernes, 2020). While AI and other advanced tools expand TBT capabilities, adoption remains context-dependent, with equity encompassing infrastructure, teacher readiness, relevant content, and measurable outcomes (Müller & Schurr, 2016; García-Morales et al., 2021). Advances in generative artificial intelligence have introduced new opportunities for technology-based teaching (TBT), providing innovative digital tools that may enhance teaching and learning when appropriately implemented (Weller et al., 2022). Benefits include efficiency gains, personalized learning, creativity, and productivity, but risks persist, including diminished social learning, health concerns, and exposure to misinformation (García-Morales et al., 2021; Hwa, 2018; Falloon, 2020). Resistance from traditional systems and high initial investment remain key challenges (Müller & Schurr, 2016).

Effective TBT implementation requires a strategic, multifaceted approach. Investment in infrastructure, including high-speed Internet, devices, and equitable access to urban and rural areas, is foundational (Leal Filho et al., 2018). Capacity building ensures educators are proficient, supported, and incentivized through professional development (Chu et al., 2021). Curricula should align with sustainability goals to foster interdisciplinary skills, while continuous assessment mechanisms monitor the impact of TBT on learning, employability, and societal contributions (O’Sullivan et al., 2016). Ensuring inclusivity is crucial; TBT must be accessible to all learners to reduce the digital divide and promote equitable education (Leal Filho et al., 2018). In Sub-Saharan Africa, sustainable HE transformation depends on integrating infrastructure, training, curriculum design, collaboration, evaluation, and equity into policy and practice, preparing graduates to meet global development challenges (Mpungose, 2020; Leal Filho et al., 2018; García-Morales et al., 2021).

Research methodology

A systematic review, characterized by transparency, rigor, and replicability, was employed to synthesize and critically analyze the existing literature on technology-based teaching (TBT) in higher education (HE), with a particular emphasis on the post-COVID-19 context. Systematic reviews adopt explicit, methodical procedures to identify, evaluate, and interpret all available research pertinent to a given question or phenomenon, thereby ensuring methodological integrity and enabling replicable findings (Gough et al., 2017). This methodology was selected for its ability to comprehensively capture empirical evidence, inform policy decisions, and guide future research on TBT implementation in HE (Falloon, 2020; Jandrić, 2020). This systematic review was not prospectively registered in a formal registry such as PROSPERO. However, the review followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines to ensure methodological transparency and reproducibility. The review protocol, PRISMA checklist, flow diagram, and extracted data are publicly available via Zenodo (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19647913).

Positioning of the review approach

This study adopted a systematic review approach to synthesize and critically analyze empirical research on technology-based teaching (TBT) in higher education. Systematic reviews employ explicit, structured procedures to identify, evaluate, and interpret relevant literature, thereby ensuring methodological rigor, transparency, and reproducibility (Gough et al., 2017). The review process followed structured procedures for literature identification, screening, eligibility assessment, and inclusion. To support transparent reporting of these processes, a completed PRISMA checklist and a PRISMA flow diagram documenting study selection are provided as extended data and are publicly available via an external data repository. This approach was selected to move beyond descriptive reporting toward critical synthesis and interpretation of evidence relating to the post-COVID-19 transformation of higher education. Given the rapid expansion of research on digital and technology-mediated teaching during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, a systematic review was considered appropriate for examining patterns, contradictions, ethical concerns, and contextual factors shaping TBT implementation across diverse higher education settings (Falloon, 2020; Jandrić, 2020). The systematic review methodology enables the integration of quality appraisal and thematic synthesis, allowing for deeper analytical insight into pedagogical, institutional, and socio-technical dimensions of TBT. This methodological positioning also supports critical reflection on the assumptions underpinning technology adoption in higher education and avoids technological determinism by interrogating how, why, and for whom technology-based teaching is implemented across varied contexts (Selwyn, 2010). The approach aligns with the study’s objective of producing evidence-informed insights to guide policy development, pedagogical innovation, and future research in higher education.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria: To ensure methodological rigor and relevance, strict inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Only peer-reviewed journal articles reporting original empirical studies were considered. The review was limited to publications from 2020 onwards to reflect real-time perspectives on TBT adoption during and immediately after the COVID-19 outbreak, supported by (Guangul et al., 2020; Adarkwah, 2021; Mpungose, 2020). Both print publications and “online first” articles were included. Included studies focused on how digital and remote teaching methodologies were conceptualized, operationalized, and experienced in HE institutions globally during the pandemic. Excluded studies were those lacking empirical data (e.g., opinion pieces or conceptual essays), not explicitly focused on TBT in HE, or not published in peer-reviewed outlets. Before the formal search, search terms and strategies were iteratively developed through pilot searches to optimize Boolean operators and keyword combinations. The search strategy combined keywords and Boolean operators, including: (“technology-based teaching” OR “digital learning” OR “e-learning”) AND (“higher education” OR “universities”) AND (“post-COVID-19” OR “pandemic”). Filters were applied to limit results to English-language publications between 2002 and 2024 across Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar.

Screening and selection process: The screening process consisted of two stages: title and abstract screening, followed by full-text review. Where possible, screening decisions were cross-checked to minimize selection bias. The initial search retrieved 204 records. Titles and abstracts were independently screened using the inclusion/exclusion criteria to reduce bias and ensure consistency. This stage narrowed the pool to 84 potentially eligible articles. Following 34 duplicate removal and full-text evaluation, and 18 articles were excluded for insufficient empirical rigor or limited relevance to the HE–TBT–COVID-19 nexus, leaving 32 studies. An additional 17 studies were included due to access to the full publication and the thematic alignment, resulting in a final dataset of 49 high-quality empirical articles.

Quality and relevance assessment and content extraction: To ensure trustworthiness and relevance, an assessment rubric was developed to evaluate each study’s methodological rigor, conceptual clarity, and alignment with study objectives. The rubric was pilot-tested on three studies and revised before full application. Data extracted from each study included author(s), year of publication, country, study design, sample characteristics, type of technology used, and key findings related to teaching, learning, and knowledge production (Mpungose, 2020; García-Morales et al., 2021). Independent reviewers extracted data, with inter-reviewer reliability ensured through a consensus-building process that harmonized coding and resolved discrepancies (Falloon, 2020). A qualitative appraisal of the included studies was conducted based on the clarity of the research design, methodological rigor, data transparency, and relevance to the review objectives. Studies lacking sufficient empirical detail or methodological clarity were excluded.

Thematic synthesis: A thematic synthesis approach was employed to analyze the data. The extracted findings were inductively coded and grouped into recurring themes related to access, engagement, pedagogy, and ethical considerations. These themes were further analyzed using Actor–Network Theory (ANT) to examine the interactions between human and technological actors.

Deductive coding: A pre-defined coding framework, based on the central research questions and theoretical constructs, guided the initial analysis. Core themes included technological integration, pedagogical transformation, student engagement, and digital inequalities (Falloon, 2020; García-Morales et al., 2021; Jantjies & Joy, 2017).

Inductive coding: Emergent themes developed organically from the dataset, including ethical considerations surrounding TBT, such as privacy, surveillance, digital exclusion, and academic integrity (Stückelberger, n.d.; García-Morales et al., 2021; Gibson et al., 2020). This iterative process allowed the coding framework to evolve, ensuring analytical depth and comprehensiveness.

Iterative coding and refinement: Multiple coding cycles were conducted to refine thematic clarity. Each iteration involved re-examining raw data, adjusting code definitions, and grouping related concepts to maintain conceptual coherence. This iterative process facilitated both explicit and latent content analysis, achieving conceptual saturation (Falloon, 2020; Jandrić, 2020).

Descriptive and integrative synthesis: The findings were initially synthesized descriptively, highlighting disciplinary diversity, variations in technological infrastructure, and pedagogical adaptations across contexts. Thematic clusters included digital pedagogy, institutional adaptation, student autonomy, and psychosocial barriers. A subsequent holistic synthesis integrated findings across studies, capturing country-specific, socio-cultural, and temporal dynamics affecting TBT adoption. Cross-cutting issues, such as the multidimensional nature of ethical challenges, were emphasized as pervasive concerns transcending individual institutional contexts.

Critical reflection: The review critically interrogated the assumption that TBT is inherently beneficial, highlighting the prevalence of technological determinism in many studies (Selwyn, 2010; Gibson et al., 2020). Analyzing how, why, and for whom TBT was implemented, the review emphasized the socio-political, economic, and ideological dimensions of digital education policy.

Study selection: The process of study identification, screening, eligibility assessment, and final inclusion is summarised using a PRISMA flow diagram. The initial database search yielded 204 records. Following title and abstract screening, full-text assessment, and application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 49 peer-reviewed empirical studies were included in the final synthesis.

Methodological outcomes: Through rigorous selection, quality appraisal, and iterative coding, this systematic review produced an empirically grounded, theoretically informed understanding of TBT in HE during the immediate post-pandemic period. The methodology provides transparency, replicability, and a critical lens on global TBT practices, barriers, and opportunities, offering actionable guidance for policymaking, pedagogical innovation, and future research in higher education. Following the systematic screening, quality appraisal, and thematic analysis procedures described above, the final corpus comprised 49 peer-reviewed empirical studies. The Results section presents a structured synthesis of these studies, focusing on patterns of technology-based teaching adoption, pedagogical transformation, institutional responses, and persistent challenges in the post-COVID-19 higher education landscape. Findings are organized thematically to reflect both dominant trends and critical tensions identified across diverse institutional and socio-economic contexts.

Recommendations for the future of technology-Based teaching (TBT) in south african higher Education: strategies for the post-Covid landscape

The effective implementation of Technology-Based Teaching (TBT) in developing countries faces multifaceted barriers, including limited infrastructure, uneven access to digital devices, and gaps in digital literacy. Nonetheless, substantial improvements are achievable through strategic, adaptable, and multi-layered interventions. Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are well-positioned to lead these efforts by providing affordable or free digital resources, establishing dedicated TBT learning centers, and offering accessible TBT literacy programs tailored to both students and educators. Given the evolving and unpredictable nature of post-COVID-19 education, collaborative approaches are essential. HEIs must be empowered to assume central roles in advancing TBT by partnering with government agencies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and private sector stakeholders to secure access to TBT infrastructure through donations, coordinated center development, or technology-driven learning initiatives. Exemplifying such collaboration, the Good Work Foundation in Mpumalanga has developed TBT-integrated learning campuses that embed digital literacy into various academic programs, addressing access challenges while remaining relevant as the sector transitions beyond the pandemic.

Practical measures to enhance access include creating Wi-Fi hotspots and learning centers in underserved HEIs, providing students and staff with access to TBT libraries and resources. HEIs can supplement these initiatives by offering free library access, while internet service providers can contribute by providing connectivity zones. Traditional libraries also play a critical role in supporting digital learning by providing TBT-enabled devices, internet access, and digital learning programs, alongside efforts to digitize resources that expand availability. Promoting Open Educational Resources (OER) is another impactful strategy that reduces the cost of learning materials while enhancing inclusivity. Supportive policy frameworks can stimulate the creation, adaptation, and integration of OER into TBT initiatives, thereby expanding access to high-quality academic content. Effective stakeholder collaboration among HEIs, governments, NGOs, and private sector partners facilitates resource pooling and knowledge sharing. Policy incentives can further encourage these partnerships. For instance, initiatives such as Google’s provision of open textbook access to underserved HEIs in Russia via national libraries illustrate the potential of coordinated efforts to broaden TBT accessibility.

In the South African context, adopting zero-rated platforms that enable data-free access to academic content can significantly improve equitable access to online databases, textbooks, and TBT tools. Such platforms may be subsidized, ad-supported, or integrated into institutional agreements, with donor agencies and NGOs contributing data packages or supporting the zero-rating of institutional websites. These interventions, however, are contingent upon the expansion of TBT training initiatives. Academics must acquire competencies in both TBT hardware and software to effectively facilitate digital learning.

Innovative training models, such as assigning ‘TBT responsibility mentors’ to support learners and guide curriculum integration, have shown promise in enhancing faculty engagement and student learning outcomes. HEIs should also consider providing free or subsidized TBT training materials and courses, particularly when coupled with zero-rated platforms. Resources such as Developing Academic Literacies for HE demonstrate the value of embedding TBT literacy components to support educators transitioning to digital pedagogies.

Finally, future research should focus on applying learning analytics to evaluate the effectiveness of blended TBT models across diverse South African HE contexts. Such investigations will inform sustainable, inclusive, and evidence-based strategies for TBT adoption, ensuring that technology enhances learning outcomes without exacerbating existing inequalities.