Santosh Panda
There have been tremendous developments in digital technologies and digital education during the past decade, and their extensive use, especially during and after the Covid-19 pandemic. Extensive application of digital education depends largely on teacher efficacy in its contribution to enhancing the quality of learning and student learning outcomes. A significant number of research studies conducted on digital education, teacher efficacy and student learning provide us with evidence to chart digital education strategies and deploy appropriate teacher professional development programmes. Ma et al. (2021) report that online teaching self-efficacy was associated with online teaching experience, and there was an increase in technology application during Covid-19. Further, online teaching competence and self-efficacy were found to be associated with emotional regulation and digital burn-out (Yang & Du, 2024). Though teachers’ pedagogical-technological skills positively affected their teaching effectiveness, there was minimal evidence of the effect on their satisfaction (Pham et al., 2021), and that, though teachers possessed the digital competency and self-efficacy required for online teaching during Covid-19, they could not engage with students due to a lack of appropriate tools and adequate training (Ogodo et al., 2021).
Mannila et al. (2018) underline that teacher self-efficacy in their digital competence is critical in the context of technology-enabled teaching-learning; that technology competence, performance and social outcome expectations, and IT support influence teacher self-efficacy (Crossan, 2020); and, therefore, continuing professional development is essential to keep pace with this changing technological world and teaching contexts. Higher online competency levels of teachers with additional online qualifications had a positive association with higher online teaching efficacy (Dolighan & Owen, 2021). Teacher professional learning has also had considerable effect on student digital skills and learning outcomes, and teacher Continuing Professional Development CPD should be seen as a comprehensive strategy within the trajectory of professional learning (Ventista & Brown, 2023). It is also essential that a comprehensive and expanded view of teachers’ digital competence is taken, inclusive of knowledge complexity, ethical dimensions, safety, and productivity in digitally mediated environments (Falloon, 2020). The digital self-efficacy (DSE) analysis and the scale developed by Ulfert-Blank and Schmidt (2022) should be useful to teachers and researchers in revising their digital competency and self-efficacy strategies.
Teacher resilience and competence are important for sustainability of online learning and improvement in student learning outcomes. Liu et al. (2022) concluded that teacher competence and resilience were positively related to perceived online learning outcomes of students. Therefore, teacher support is critical in enhancing technology-enabled learning self-efficacy of students, and technology autonomy could further leverage fostering of conducive learning environments (Wang et al., 2024). Wei (2024), in a comprehensive study, indicated the importance of congruence of digital ability, instructional design and learner support in enhancing learning outcomes in a blended learning context. The author suggests providing for purposeful digital engagement alongside digital competency to enhance student self-regulation and learning. A recent critical review (Corry & Stella, 2018) suggests that it is important to develop measures of self-efficacy in online pedagogy, and investigate the role of student self-efficacy in teacher self-efficacy in online education.
There is research evidence that supports teachers’ belief that educational technology has a positive effect on student learning outcomes. A recent comprehensive review by Akintayo et al. (2024) suggests that effective deployment and integration of educational technology into the process of teaching-learning enhances student engagement, knowledge retention, and skills of higher order thinking, though this needs to be viewed in relation to the pedagogic approaches adopted and the type of learning environment provided. Instead of general ICT use, subject-specific ICT use has been found to be effectively linked to student achievements (Dipendra et al., 2025). In the context of language learning, it has been reported that the higher the digital competency the better the achievement of language learning outcomes (Cao et al., 2023). Further, in the context of online learning, there is significant impact of online learning communities on student learning outcomes (Cao & Yu, 2023), and integration of technology to foster motivation, engagement and effective communication. In a comprehensive national study in the UK, Lewin et al. (2019) reported mixed results for the effect of technology on student learning in literacy, language and mathematics, though reading technologies were found to have no significant positive effect. The authors suggest that technology’s effect depends on many factors including content, pedagogy, support, access and integration with teaching-learning.
Digital resource utilisation also facilitates student engagement, self-efficacy, and learning. In a large-scale database-analysed study, Joshi et al. (2025) report that while high-income countries demonstrated higher digital utilisation and self-efficacy than other countries, student engagement in active digital learning activities off campus was higher in upper-middle-income countries than the lower-middle-income countries. The authors suggest addressing digital disparity and digital resource utilisation to ensure educational equity.
Research evidence suggests that positive attitude and digital literacy of students affect student self-efficacy, which, in turn affects student online (social, collaborative, cognitive, behavioral, and emotional) engagement (Getenet et al., 2024). Digital learning was also found to have high positive effect on student deep learning, especially in the humanities and social sciences (Wu, 2024). Further, community of inquiry (COI) presences affect the student learning outcomes in online and blended learning — teaching presence was found to have moderate correlation with actual learning; cognitive presence had high correlation with perceived learning; and both cognitive and teaching presence had higher correlation with student online satisfaction (Martin et al., 2022).
Based on the brief analysis of research studies conducted in the area of digital education and student learning outcomes presented above, in this July 2025 issue of the journal JL4D, we have included 14 peer-reviewed papers and one book review under the sub-sections of: invited paper, research papers, case studies, report from the field, and book review, dealing with the main theme of this issue ‘Digital Education, Teacher Efficacy, and Learner Outcomes’.
The Invited Paper on the decadal critical review of this Journal of Learning for Development was prepared by Cefa, Zawacki-Richter and Bozkurt, who undertook this task by invitation, and whose paper was also peer-reviewed and revised.
The first review on the five years of this journal (2014-2018) was undertaken by Mishra (2019) who noted the establishment of the JL4D by the Commonwealth of Learning (COL) in 2013, to be published in 2014, with a focus on how learning leads to development, and how learning for development works. The first chief editor of the Journal noted that the Journal addressed all innovations in learning aiming to contribute to social and economic development (Tait, 2016). In an editorial to the July 2023 issue, the chief editor had categorically outlined the refined focus of the Journal and summarised seven micro-themes that the Journal had so far addressed (Panda, 2023). Mishra (2019), in his first five years’ review, had concluded: there was more focus on student learning, teachers and teaching, and contextual needs, largely contributed by experts in educational technology and Open and Distance Learning (ODL), and the focus was on innovations in learning. Cefa et al., in this (first) review paper, present a comprehensive review for the decade 2014-2024 by employing bibliometric analysis, content analysis, citation analysis, and global impact. The findings suggest that: the contributors during the decade were from 55 countries (largely contributed by Tanzania, UK, South Africa, India, and Canada); the major thematic focus had been on: education equity, OER, capacity building, digital literacy, and pedagogic innovations; and the publications underlined an inclusive platform where research, practice, and policy had been integrally addressed. The authors suggested future researchers and contributors should work towards more interdisciplinary collaboration in authorship for sustainable educational futures.
In the Research Paper section, we have included six peer-reviewed papers dealing with digital resources management, blended learning, Moodle, ubiquitous learning, artificial intelligence vis-à-vis student wellbeing, and learning outcomes.
The first paper, by Anthonysamy, Alasa and Ali suggests that in hybrid learning contexts, digital resource management, including time management, assumes importance in its influence on intellectual capacity and student learning outcomes. Tran and Le’s study on students’ feedback use in the context of blended learning underlines the crucial significance of self-regulated learning, self-efficacy, and positive attitude in the effective utilisation of student feedback. In a comprehensive study on student log records, Peramunugamage and co-researchers suggest a positive relationship between the degree of student engagement and performance in the context of online learning in Sri Lanka and Brazil. Learning analytics became handy in the multidimensional platform used by them, which combined Moodle discussion forums, wiki collaborative activities, Moodle workshops, and group assignments.
In a research study on ubiquitous project-based learning (U-Pjbl), Safiah and co-researchers tried out this model for improving critical thinking skills in elementary school students, and suggest that U-Pjbl has the ability to improve critical thinking in technology-enabled learning contexts. Tanuja Khan and co-researchers in their study suggested the positive effect of an AI-enabled online learning platform (i.e., SWAYAM) on online teacher attitude and effectiveness of AI4D and their combined effect on student learning outcomes. In a scoping review paper on ICT-based learning media on student learning outcomes, Budiarto and co-researchers suggest that, while there are a considerable number of studies on digital learning relating to Moodle applications, there is a need to focus research efforts on other learning media, especially in the context of developing countries.
We have included six peer-reviewed papers in theCase Study section.
In the case study on integration of AI in learning English writing, Aini and Basthomi present a review of conceptual analysis on this topic and suggest that AI integration based on this conceptual analysis can be compared with other frameworks like Technology Acceptance Model and TPACK in teaching English writing. Nyambe, in the next case study, analyses the digital learning environment and scaffolding epistemological access to online learning in the University of Namibia during the Covid-19 pandemic. The author suggests adopting the Community of Inquiry framework as a sustainable strategy for online teaching-learning. In the next case study, on a systematic review of the impact of flipped learning on students’ emotional attributes, Hanif and co-researchers underline that flipped learning, as a form of blended learning, holds promise in reversing classroom teaching approaches and enhancing students’ emotional attributes and learning. In the case study on the integration of Google Workspace tools for enhancing teaching efficiency and student engagement in Rwandan schools, Niyibizi reports that, while more than 90% of teachers benefited from this, a significant number of teachers expected more training; and nearly 85% reported a perceived increase in student engagement.
Graham and co-researchers report that in a distance education teacher training programme in the University of Pretoria, factors like attainment of higher qualifications were related to students’ wellbeing (i.e., sense of belonging, positive emotions, career progress, self-confidence, and self-actualisation). In our next interesting case study, on ODL for prison inmates in Portugal, Monteiro and co-researchers, based on document analysis and trainer interviews, analyse the regulatory, technological, and humanistic dimensions of ODL, and suggest enhancing digital inclusion and lifelong learning opportunities for prison inmates.
In the Report from the Field section, we have included an interesting and innovative peer-reviewed paper by Balaji, Ogange and Mays on the use of generative AI for adapting OER by teachers and TVET trainers under the Teacher-in the Loop (TiL-AI) initiative of the Commonwealth of Learning in various Commonwealth countries. During the process of adaptation, teachers were also initiated into a deeper understanding of the application of AI in teaching and vocational training, and into promoting inclusive practices and sustained mentorship. The findings of phase-1 of this ongoing initiative should be highly useful to teachers, teacher educators, and researchers in the Commonwealth and other parts of the globe in integrating AI-based OER into curriculum and teaching-learning.
The critical review of Global education monitoring report pacific, technology in education: A tool on whose terms?, a book on a global report on technology in education in the Pacific, included in the Book Review section, published by UNESCO and COL, and reviewed by Mark Nichols, should be an interesting read for all those involved in technology-enabled teaching-learning and training. The reviewer concluded, “It is a landmark reference for educational technology in the Pacific, and even with the extreme differences across countries, its relevance to any individual nation is sealed by the strength of its recommendations”.
The outcomes of the research and case studies in this issue of the Journal corroborate with the findings suggested by the other researchers analysed and presented at the beginning of this editorial: that digital self-efficacy is related to digital/online/blended teaching-learning experiences, training in these competencies, expertise in digital tools; that digital and/or online teaching-learning has a positive effect on student digital self-efficacy and learning outcomes; that there is a need for congruence between digital learning, instructional design/ pedagogy, learner support, and digital resource management; and that teacher self-efficacy, resilience, and competency should lead to/ensure student digital self-efficacy, resilience, emotional wellbeing, satisfaction, and quality learning experience.
Finally, my sincere thanks are due to the Associate Editors Dr Tony Mays, Dr Betty Ogange and Dr Sanjaya Mishra; Book Review Editor Dr Jako Olivier; Technical Editor Alan Doree, and editorial assistant Carol Walker for facilitating this issue being published on time. We hope our readers enjoy reading and benefitting from the papers and book reviews of this issue.
Akintayo, O.T., Eden, C.A., Ayeni, O.O., & Onyebuchi, N.C. (2024). Evaluating the impact of educational technology on learning outcomes in the higher education sector: A systematic review. Open Access Research Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies. https://doi.org/10.53022/oarjms.2024.7.2.0026
Cao, J., Bhuvaneswari, G., Arumugam, T. & Aravind, B.R. (2023). The digital edge: Examining the relationship between digital competency and language learning outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1187909. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1187909
Cao, W., & Yu, Z. (2023). Exploring learning outcomes, communication, anxiety, and motivation in learning communities: A systematic review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10, 866. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02325-2
Corry, M., & Stella, J. (2018). Teacher self-efficacy in online education: A review of the literature. Research in Learning Technology, 26, 1-12.
Crossan, J. (2020). Thai teachers’ self-efficacy towards educational technology integration. Assumption University-eJournal of Interdisciplinary Research, 5(1), 107-123.
Dipendra, K.C., Pramod, K.C., Rado, I., & Vichit-Vadakan, N. (2025). Digital inequality and learning outcomes: Evidence from Thailand. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13570-0
Dolighan, T., & Owen, M. (2021). Teacher efficacy for online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. Brock Education: A Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 30(1), 95-116. https://journals.library.brocku.ca/brocked
Falloon, G. (2020). From digital literacy to digital competence: the teacher digital competency (TDC) framework. Education Technology Research & Development, 68, 2449–2472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09767-4
Getenet, S., Cantle, R., Redmond, P., & Albion, P. (2024). Students’ digital technology attitude, literacy and self efficacy and their effect on online learning engagement. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(3). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00437-y
Joshi, D.R., Khanal, J., Chapai, K.P.S. & Adhikari, K.P. (2025). The impact of digital resource utilization on student learning outcomes and self-efficacy across different economic contexts: A comparative analysis of PISA, 2022. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 8, 100443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2025.100443
Lewin, C., Smith, A., Morris, S., & Craig, E. (2019). Using digital technology to improve learning: Evidence review. Education Endowment Foundation. https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/Using_Digital_Technology_to_Impr ove_learning_Evidence_Review.pdf
Liu, Y., Zhao, L., & Su, Y-S. (2022). The impact of teacher competence in online teaching on perceived online learning outcomes during the COVID-19 outbreak: A moderated-mediation model of teacher resilience and age. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 6282. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19106282
Ma, K., Chutiyami, M., Zhang, Y., & & Nicoll, S. (2921). Online teaching self-efficacy during COVID-19: Changes, its associated factors and moderators. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 6675–6697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10486-3
Mannila, L., Nordén, L.Å., & Pears, A. (2018). Digital competence, teacher self-efficacy and training needs. In ICER 2018 - Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 78-85). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3230977.3230993
Martin, F., Wu, T., Wan, L., & Xie, K. (2022). A meta-analysis on the community of inquiry presences and learning outcomes in online and blended learning environments. Online Learning Journal, 26(1), 3425-359.
Mishra, S. (2019). Early years of the Journal of Learning for Development: A combination of bibliometrics and thematic analysis. Journal of Learning for Development, 6(2), 160-176.
Ogodo, J.A., Simon, M., Morris, D., & Akubo, M. (2021). Examining K-12 teachers’ digital competency and technology self-efficacy during COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 21(11), 13-27.
Panda, S. (2023). Editorial — Changing perceptions of ‘Learning for Development’ in the new normal. Journal of Learning for Development, 10(2), i-vii.
Pham, P., Phan, T.T., Nguyen, Y. & Hoang, A. (2021). Factor associated with teacher satisfaction and online teaching effectiveness under adversity situations: A case of Vietnamese teachers during COVID-19. Journal of Education, 203(3). DOI: 10.1177/00220574211039483
Tait, A. (2016). From the Emeritus Editor… Journal of Learning for Development, 3(2), 3-6. http://jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/article/view/151/133
Ulfert-Blank, A. & Schmidt, I. (2022). Assessing digital self-efficacy: Review and scale development. Computers & Education, 191, 104626.
Ventista, O.M., & Brown, C. (2023). Teachers’ professional learning and its impact on students’ learning outcomes: Findings from a systematic review. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 8, 100565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100565
Wang, D., Qiu, Q., Wang, L., Jiang, Y., & Ran, A. (2024). Empowering the digital learner: Exploring the relationship between teacher support, autonomy in technology, and self-efficacy in Chinese vocational colleges. Psychology in the Schools, 61(12). https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23294
Wei, Z. (2024). Navigating digital learning landscapes: Unveiling the interplay between learning behaviours, digital literacy, and educational outcomes. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15, 10516–10546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01522-3
Wu, X. (2024). Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: A meta‐analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 425-458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12307-1
Yang, X., & Du, J. (2024). The effect of teacher self-efficacy, online pedagogical and content knowledge, and emotion regulation on teacher digital burnout: A mediation model. BMC Psychology, 12-51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01540-z
Santosh Panda
Chief Editor, JL4D
Cite this paper as: Panda, S. (2025). Editorial — Digital education, teacher efficacy, and student learning outcomes. Journal of Learning for Development, 12(2), i-vii.