The Digital Education Divide and Educational Inequality: A Systematic Literature Review
Main Article Content
Keywords
digital education divide, educational inequality, digital equity, digital literacy, systematic review
Abstract
This study examines how the digital education divide contributes to educational inequality and identifies strategies for promoting digital equity in contemporary education systems. Using a systematic literature review approach, the study analyses 20 peer-reviewed studies selected from Scopus, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. The review focuses on formal education contexts, including primary, secondary, and higher education. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-informed screening process was adopted, and thematic coding was used to synthesise findings across different national and educational settings. The review finds that the digital education divide is a multidimensional problem that extends beyond unequal access to devices and internet connectivity. It is also shaped by differences in digital literacy, quality of participation, teacher digital competence, institutional support, policy design, and cultural inclusion. These factors interact with wider socioeconomic, regional, linguistic, and cultural inequalities, creating uneven opportunities for students to engage meaningfully in digital learning. The findings further suggest that technology expansion alone cannot reduce educational inequality unless it is supported by inclusive pedagogy, sustained teacher development, equitable infrastructure, and context-sensitive policy interventions. The study concludes that addressing the digital education divide requires a shift from access-based solutions to a broader equity-oriented approach that values meaningful participation, cultural responsiveness, and systemic support. This review contributes to a clearer understanding of the mechanisms through which digital inequality reproduces educational disadvantage and highlights future directions for research, policy, and educational practice.
References
- [1] Walper, S., & Kuger, S. (2023). Bildung und Bildungsdefizite in Kita und Schule im Rahmen der Coronapandemie. Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde, 171(7), 615–622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00112-023-01779-7
- [2] Warschauer, M., & Matuchniak, T. (2010). New technology and digital worlds: Analyzing evidence of equity in access, use, and outcomes. Review of Research in Education, 34(1), 179–225. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X09349791
- [3] Mwansa, G., Ngandu, M. R., & Mkwambi, Z. (2025). Bridging the digital divide: Exploring the challenges and solutions for digital exclusion in rural South Africa. Discover Global Society, 3(54), Article 54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44282-025-00189-2
- [4] Child, G. S., & Song, K. (2023). Digital inequities: Promoting digital justice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability, 15(17), 12862. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712862
- [5] Hao, X. (2023). Does COVID-19 persistently affect educational inequality after school reopening? Evidence from Internet search data in China. PLOS ONE, 18(10), e0293168. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293168
- [6] Niembro, A. (2014). Brechas regionales y provinciales de desarrollo educativo en Argentina: Disparidades crecientes en la última década (2000–2009). Revista Iberoamericana de Educación Superior, 5(14), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.22201/iisue.20072872e.2014.14.128
- [7] Frei-Landau, R., & Avidov-Ungar, O. (2022). Teaching and Teacher Education, 111, 103623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103623
- [8] Anderson, L. W. (2021). Schooling interrupted: Educating children and youth in the Covid-19 era. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 11(Special Issue), 17–38. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1128
- [9] Taşkın, N., Kandemir, B., & Erzurumlu, K. (2023). University student satisfaction and behavioural engagement during emergency remote teaching. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 49(1). https://doi.org/10.21432/cjlt28242
- [10] Anthony, J., & Padmanabhan, S. (2010). Digital divide and equity in education: A Rawlsian analysis. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 12(4), 37–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228053.2010.10856195
- [11] Pangrazio, L., & Sefton-Green, J. (2021). Digital rights, digital citizenship and digital literacy: What’s the difference? Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 10(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2021.1.616
- [12] Livingstone, S., & Stoilova, M. (2021). Using global evidence to benefit children’s online opportunities and minimise risks. Contemporary Social Science, 16(2), 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2019.1608371
- [13] Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
- [14] 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., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
- [15] Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470754887
- [16] Virginia Braun, & Victoria Clarke. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
- [17] Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
- [18] Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
- [19] Bacci, S., Bertaccini, B., Del Sarto, S., Grilli, L., & Rampichini, C. (2023). Statistical methods to estimate the impact of remote teaching on university students’ performance. Springer Nature Quality & Quantity, 57, 5513–5531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-023-01612-z
- [20] Abdallah, A. K., & Alriyami, R. (2022). Changes in the education landscape caused by COVID-19: Opportunities and challenges from UAE perspective. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 14(3), 544–559. https://doi.org/10.18844/wjet.v14i3.7193
- [21] Slepneva, M., & Ladosha, O. M. (2022). Mobile Literacy and Digital Competences of Foreign Language Teachers in Higher School. In 2022 VI International Conference on Information Technologies in Engineering Education (Inforino) (pp. 1–4). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/Inforino53888.2022.9782998
- [22] Gordillo, A., Barra, E., López-Pernas, S., & Quemada, J. (2021). Development of teacher digital competence in the area of e-safety through educational video games. Sustainability, 13(15), 8485. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158485
- [23] Liu, H., Zhang, K., Wang, L., & Chen, J. (2025). Educational burden reduction, educational inequality, and enrollment pressure: Evidence from China. Economics and Human Biology, 56, 101459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2024.101459
- [24] Sanz Ponce, R., & López-Luján, E. (2022). Aprendizajes educativos como consecuencia de la pandemia COVID-19. ¿Qué papel debe jugar la escuela en el nuevo escenario mundial? Revista Complutense de Educación, 33(2), 215–223. https://doi.org/10.5209/rced.73928
- [25] Boison, B., & Burke, A. (2025). Fostering cultural responsiveness online: Elementary educators’ experiences during the COVID-19 shift to online education. Computers in the Schools. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2025.2453728
