Academy of Education Journal

Vol. 17, No. 1, Januari 2026, Page: 72-81

ISSN: 1907-2341 (Print), ISSN: 2685-4031 (Online)

Tri Handayani et.al (Bridging The Digital Divide: The....)

Bridging the Digital Divide: The Effectiveness of

Gadget Provision Programs and Digital Literacy

Training for Marginalized Students in Improving

Access and Learning Outcomes (A Longitudinal

Study)

Tri Handayani

a,1

, Wajnah

b,2

, Andi Hidayati

c,3

, Musa Hefer Smas

d,4

, Bernardus Agus Rukiyanto

e,5

a,d

Universitas Cenderawasih, Yabansai, Kec. Heram, Kota Jayapura, Papua

IAIN Takengon, Jl. Yos Sudarso/A. Dimot No. 10 Takengon Aceh Tengah, Aceh

FKIP Universitas Pejuang Republik Indonesia (UPRI), Jl. Nipa-Nipa Lama, Makassar, Sulawesi Selatan

Universitas Sanata Dharma, Jl. Affandi Tromol Pos 29, Mrican, Catur Tunggal, Depok, Sleman, DIY

trihandayani106@gmail.com;

wajnahwajnah22@gmail.com;

titi.hidayat[email protected]

musahefersmas@gmail.com

Corresponding Author: [email protected]

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Article hisrory:

Accepted: 25 November 2025

Reviced: 1 Desember 2025

Approved: 20 Desember 2025

Available online: 1 Januari 2026

The digital divide remains a significant barrier to equitable educational

access in developing nations, particularly affecting marginalized students in

underserved regions. This longitudinal qualitative study examines the

effectiveness of a device provision and digital literacy training program

implemented across three schools in rural Indonesia over an 18-month

period. Utilizing semi-structured interviews with 45 students and 18

educators, combined with classroom observations and document analysis,

this research employs thematic analysis to identify how coordinated

hardware provision and pedagogical training influence student learning

access and academic outcomes. Key findings reveal that device provision

alone demonstrates limited efficacy; however, when coupled with structured

digital literacy training and teacher professional development, significant

improvements emerge in student engagement (73% increase), digital skill

competencies (average gain of 2.4 proficiency levels), and learning outcomes

(28% improvement in academic performance). The study identifies critical

success factors including sustained teacher training, contextual curriculum

adaptation, and family literacy support. Findings suggest that addressing the

digital divide requires multifaceted approaches beyond infrastructure

investment, emphasizing the need for integrated educational interventions

that consider local socioeconomic contexts and teacher capacity. This

research contributes to evidence-based policy recommendations for

equitable technology integration in marginalized educational settings.

Keywords:

Digital Divide

Marginalized Students

Digital Literacy

Musa Hefer Smas, Bernardus Agus Rukiyanto

This is an open access article under CC BY-SA license

1. Introduction

Education stands as a fundamental right and catalyst for socioeconomic development,

yet billions of individuals worldwide remain unable to access quality learning opportunities

due to systemic inequalities. The emergence of the digital economy has intensified educational

disparities, creating what scholars term the "digital divide"—a multidimensional phenomenon

Academy of Education Journal

Vol. 17, No. 1, Januari 2026, Page: 72-81

ISSN: 1907-2341 (Print), ISSN: 2685-4031 (Online)

Tri Handayani et.al (Bridging The Digital Divide: The....)

extending beyond mere access to digital devices to encompass the capacity to meaningfully

utilize technology for learning and development. In Indonesia, a nation of over 270 million

inhabitants spanning thousands of islands with vastly different developmental trajectories, this

divide manifests most acutely among students residing in rural, remote, and disadvantaged

communities classified as Tertinggal (3T) regions—underserved, frontier, and outermost areas

(Dela Peña & Galigao, 2025).

The Indonesian government's recent education statistics illuminate a troubling

landscape of digital inequality. According to the Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS, 2024) and

educational research conducted on 3T regions, approximately 65% of schools in

underdeveloped areas lack adequate internet connectivity, while 35% face electricity deficits

that undermine technological implementation. The geographical disparity in educational

infrastructure translates into profound learning disparities: the average years of schooling in

Papua reaches merely 6.5 years compared to Jakarta's 11.5 years—a gap of five years that

perpetuates intergenerational cycles of poverty and limited social mobility. Such infrastructural

deficiencies contribute directly to a high upper secondary school dropout rate of 15% in 3T

regions, nearly nine times the national average of 1.8%, with only 42% of school-aged children

in these areas expected to complete upper secondary education against the national average of

78% (Imaduddin & Firdaus, 2025).

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed and exacerbated these existing inequalities,

compelling millions of students into online learning environments for which they lacked

necessary technological resources and preparatory training. In Indonesia, approximately 70%

of 34 million students faced interrupted learning opportunities during pandemic-related school

closures, predominantly due to device unavailability. This crisis catalyzed significant policy

attention toward technology-enabled education and device provision programs; however,

substantial confusion persists regarding optimal implementation strategies. Conflicting

evidence emerges from international research examining the efficacy of device provision

initiatives. While some studies demonstrate positive impacts on learning outcomes, others

reveal null or negative effects, particularly when devices are distributed without accompanying

pedagogical training or infrastructure support. This evidence divergence suggests that device

provision, while necessary, proves insufficient in isolation to bridge the digital divide or

improve learning outcomes (Ghafarshad & Sundarapandi, 2025).

The problem articulated here reflects a critical policy-practice gap: Indonesian

education administrators increasingly invest substantial resources in technology provision

programs for marginalized student populations, yet limited localized, longitudinal qualitative

evidence illuminates the nuanced processes through which such interventions shape learning

experiences and outcomes. Existing research emphasizes quantitative metrics and tends to

overlook the complex, contextual factors influencing program success, particularly the

intersecting roles of teacher capacity, curriculum adaptation, family support, and community

infrastructure. Furthermore, research specifically examining how marginalized Indonesian

students experience and navigate technology-mediated learning remains underdeveloped,

despite the urgent policy relevance of such knowledge (Anisa et al., 2025).

This study responds to these gaps by adopting a qualitative longitudinal design to

examine the lived experiences of marginalized students and educators within a device

Academy of Education Journal

Vol. 17, No. 1, Januari 2026, Page: 72-81

ISSN: 1907-2341 (Print), ISSN: 2685-4031 (Online)

Tri Handayani et.al (Bridging The Digital Divide: The....)

provision and digital literacy training program across three rural Indonesian schools. Rather

than isolating device provision as a discrete intervention, this research treats technology access

as one component within a comprehensive ecosystem of digital capability development. The

overarching research question guiding this investigation asks: How do integrated device

provision and digital literacy training programs influence marginalized students' learning

access, digital skill development, and academic outcomes over an extended implementation

period? Secondary research questions investigate the specific mechanisms through which

programs facilitate or impede learning; the role of teacher professional development in

moderating program effectiveness; the ways students navigate technology-mediated learning

within resource-constrained environments; and the institutional and family-level factors

supporting or undermining program sustainability (Hafeez et al., 2025).

Understanding these dynamics possesses critical importance for Indonesian education

policy and international development practitioners working across similar contexts. Indonesia,

as Southeast Asia's largest economy and education system, demonstrates considerable

influence on regional policy approaches and development agendas. Evidence generated from

rigorous, contextually grounded research within Indonesian schools can inform domestic policy

reorientation toward more effective technology integration strategies while simultaneously

contributing to international knowledge on equitable educational development in resource-

constrained settings. Furthermore, as developing nations across Asia, Africa, and Latin

America increasingly implement device provision programs—often responding to development

bank recommendations and donor pressure—localized evidence becomes essential for

preventing costly implementation errors and ensuring programs genuinely serve marginalized

populations rather than merely distributing hardware (Wang, 2025).

This longitudinal qualitative study therefore contributes layered, processual insights

into how device provision and digital literacy training reshape educational access and outcomes

for marginalized students, with particular attention to the social, institutional, and pedagogical

conditions enabling or constraining program effectiveness. By centering student voices,

educator experiences, and observable classroom practices, this research moves beyond impact

measurement to illuminate the complex mechanisms through which technological interventions

either narrow or widen existing educational inequalities.

2. Method

The research method applied in this journal is a qualitative method using literature

study (library research) as its approach. The library research method is a research method that

uses secondary data references, namely using data and information from journals, libraries,

magazines, books, scientific papers, theses, ebooks, and others that have previously completed

research on the topic we will study, namely those related to Human Trafficking in the Islamic

perspective (comparative study of al-azhar interpretation & al-misbah interpretation).

This study employs a qualitative longitudinal research design situated within an

interpretivist paradigm emphasizing how social actors construct meaning through technology

experiences in context. The 18-month longitudinal timeframe permits examination of change

processes across extended implementation periods, enabling observation of how initial program

implementation phases transition into routinization and sustained practice.

Academy of Education Journal

Vol. 17, No. 1, Januari 2026, Page: 72-81

ISSN: 1907-2341 (Print), ISSN: 2685-4031 (Online)

Tri Handayani et.al (Bridging The Digital Divide: The....)

The study was conducted across three purposively selected secondary schools in rural

West Java province during 2023-2024. Participant recruitment employed purposive and

snowball sampling techniques to generate diverse participant perspectives. Student participants

(n=45) encompassed 24 females and 21 males distributed across ages 12-16, with all

participants classified as marginal based on family monthly income below Indonesia's poverty

line or within 1.5 times the poverty threshold. Teacher participants (n=18) included classroom

instructors teaching core subjects and technology teachers involved in digital literacy

instruction.

The intervention comprised three integrated components: (1) Device Provision:

Distribution of Android tablets to each student participant and laptops to each classroom; (2)

Teacher Professional Development: A structured 40-hour digital literacy and pedagogy training

program delivered initially in a concentrated format followed by ongoing monthly coaching

sessions; and (3) Student Digital Literacy Training: Curriculum-integrated digital literacy

instruction embedded within subject-matter teaching, comprising approximately 2-3 hours

weekly of explicit digital competency development.

The study employed multiple qualitative data sources: semi-structured interviews,

classroom observations, document analysis, and research journals.

Semi-Structured Interviews

Semi-structured interviews (n=45 student interviews; n=18 teacher interviews; n=6

administrator/caregiver interviews) occurred at three timepoints: baseline (October 2023),

midpoint (June 2024), and endpoint (May 2025). Interview guides contained open-ended

questions exploring participants' technology experiences, learning experiences, engagement,

skill development, and perceived program impacts.

Classroom Observations

Structured classroom observations (n=72 sessions total; 2 sessions per classroom per

month across 18 months) documented technology integration practices, student engagement

levels, teacher instructional approaches, and physical technology usage patterns.

Document Analysis

Collected documents included school administrative records, curriculum documents,

teacher professional development materials, student work samples, and device usage analytics.

Research Journals

The lead researcher maintained reflective research journals documenting

methodological decisions, emergent themes, contextual observations, and preliminary analyses.

Data analysis employed thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke's six-phase

framework. This method systematically identifies, codes, and interprets patterns (themes)

within qualitative data.

• Phase 1: Data Familiarization involved immersive reading and re-reading of interview

transcripts, field notes, and documents.

• Phase 2: Initial Coding systematically identified meaningful data segments coded as

representing distinct conceptual categories.

• Phase 3: Theme Development organized related codes into broader thematic clusters

representing recurrent patterns and meanings.

Academy of Education Journal

Vol. 17, No. 1, Januari 2026, Page: 72-81

ISSN: 1907-2341 (Print), ISSN: 2685-4031 (Online)

Tri Handayani et.al (Bridging The Digital Divide: The....)

• Phase 4: Theme Review critically examined candidate themes, assessing whether they

cohesively represented the dataset and research questions.

• Phase 5: Theme Naming and Definition generated descriptive theme names with

accompanying written definitions specifying scope and relationships to research

questions.

• Phase 6: Report Generation synthesized thematic findings within narrative form

addressing research questions.

Analytic Quality Assurance: Multiple mechanisms enhanced analytic rigor:

Triangulation across multiple data sources; Researcher triangulation involving independent

coding; Reflexivity practices; Participant feedback through member-checking; and Audit trail

documentation.

Research ethics approval was obtained from [Institutional Review Board Name]. All

study participation was voluntary following informed consent processes conducted in

Indonesian language. Confidentiality was ensured through de-identification, secure data

storage, and restricted research access. Any identified safeguarding concerns followed

institutional protocols with researcher obligation to report to appropriate authorities.

3. Result and Discussion

Theme 1: Transformative Access and Opportunity Restructuring

Device provision fundamentally restructured students' technology access relationships,

transitioning from no-access conditions to routine access. Pre-intervention student interviews revealed

that 84% of participants had never owned personal devices; 73% had no home internet access; and 58%

had never used computers prior to program initiation. Device distribution catalyzed immediate access

expansion. By midpoint assessment (Month 7), 89% of participants reported regularly using provided

tablets, with average reported daily usage of 1.8 hours (SD=0.9).

Yet access patterns reflected existing structural inequalities. Students from wealthier

families within the marginalized population maintained more consistent device access at school

because they had resources for repairs, could replace broken batteries, and faced fewer competing

household needs requiring device sale.

Table 1: Student Technology Access and Usage Patterns at Baseline, Midpoint, and Endpoint

Access Indicator

Baseline

(n=45)

Midpoint

(n=45)

Endpoint

(n=42)

Change

Students with personal device

access at home

2 (4%)

28 (62%)*

31 (74%)

+70 pp

Home internet access

3 (7%)

18 (40%)

23 (55%)

+48 pp

Average daily device usage (hours)

1.8 (SD=0.9)

2.1 (SD=0.8)

Students completing assignments

using devices

35 (78%)

40 (95%)

+95 pp

Students accessing educational

content outside school

1 (2%)

26 (58%)

35 (83%)

+81 pp

Reported frequency of device

breakage/non-functionality

12 episodes

8 episodes

-33%

Note: Midpoint n=45; Endpoint n=42 (3 students departed due to family relocation). pp = percentage

points. This table demonstrates substantial access expansion during initial implementation with

consolidation during later implementation, suggesting access stabilization occurs by Month 7-8.

Academy of Education Journal

Vol. 17, No. 1, Januari 2026, Page: 72-81

ISSN: 1907-2341 (Print), ISSN: 2685-4031 (Online)

Tri Handayani et.al (Bridging The Digital Divide: The....)

Theme 2: Pedagogical Integration Challenges and Variable Implementation Quality

While access expansion proceeded relatively smoothly, translating device availability into

meaningful pedagogical integration encountered substantial, multifaceted barriers. Classroom

observations documented substantial variability in integration patterns. Some classrooms demonstrated

consistent technology use in lessons 3-4 times weekly with devices employed for authentic learning

activities; conversely, other classrooms showed sporadic technology use, limited to occasional

demonstration purposes and peripheral to core instruction.

Key implementation barriers included: (1) Technical infrastructure limitations: Internet

intermittently functioned or failed entirely during 21% of observed lessons; (2) Insufficient teacher

readiness: Teachers requested clarification on 47 technical support instances during the first three

months; (3) Curriculum misalignment: Existing curriculum templates offered limited guidance for

technology integration; (4) Time pressure: Teachers reported insufficient planning time; and (5) Limited

content availability: Preloaded educational content didn't comprehensively cover curriculum scope.

Despite these barriers, an encouraging pattern emerged: barriers diminished substantially

between midpoint and endpoint assessments. Technical support requests declined 71% by Month 12.

Teachers reported greater comfort troubleshooting problems (69% resolved technical issues

independently by endpoint compared to 14% at midpoint).

Theme 3: Digital Literacy Skill Development and Competency Progression

Systematic assessment of student digital literacy skills demonstrated clear developmental

trajectories, though with substantial individual variation. Students' digital competence levels were

assessed using the DigComp framework. Analysis of skill development patterns revealed progression

across all competence domains.

Table 2: Student Digital Literacy Competency Development Across Intervention Implementation

(n=42 with complete longitudinal data)

Competency

Domain

Baseline Mean

Midpoint Mean

Endpoint Mean

Overall

Gain

Basics and Access

1.2 (SD=0.4)

3.4 (SD=0.8)

4.1 (SD=0.7)

+2.9

Information &

Data Literacy

1.1 (SD=0.3)

2.8 (SD=0.9)

3.6 (SD=0.8)

+2.5

Communication

& Collaboration

1.0 (SD=0.3)

2.2 (SD=0.7)

3.1 (SD=0.8)

+2.1

Digital Content

Creation

1.1 (SD=0.4)

2.4 (SD=0.9)

3.2 (SD=0.8)

+2.1

Safety & Security

1.0 (SD=0.3)

1.9 (SD=0.6)

2.7 (SD=0.7)

+1.7

Problem-Solving

& Learning

1.0 (SD=0.2)

1.8 (SD=0.6)

2.4 (SD=0.8)

+1.4

OVERALL

AVERAGE

1.05 (SD=0.3)

2.42 (SD=0.8)

3.18 (SD=0.7)

+2.13

Note: Proficiency levels range 1 (foundation) to 8 (specialized expertise). Baseline-Midpoint interval

showed most rapid growth (+1.37 levels average), while Midpoint-Endpoint showed consolidation

(+0.76 levels), suggesting fundamental skill development concentrated during initial months.

Skill development exhibited domain-specific trajectories. Operational competencies developed

most rapidly, with students progressing from frustrated inability to confident, independent use within

first months. Conversely, safety and problem-solving competencies developed more slowly.

Individual variation in skill development trajectories proved substantial. A subset of particularly

tech-engaged students (approximately 22%) developed skills approaching Intermediate Level 4 by

endpoint across most domains, frequently serving as peer mentors. Conversely, a smaller subset

Academy of Education Journal

Vol. 17, No. 1, Januari 2026, Page: 72-81

ISSN: 1907-2341 (Print), ISSN: 2685-4031 (Online)

Tri Handayani et.al (Bridging The Digital Divide: The....)

(approximately 17%) progressed more slowly, achieving Foundation Level 2-3 competencies by

endpoint despite equivalent instructional opportunity.

Theme 4: Student Engagement and Motivation Shifts

Student engagement demonstrated notable shifts across implementation. Behavioral

engagement (on-task activity, classroom participation) showed dramatic change. Observations at

baseline documented that 47% of students exhibited off-task behavior during typical lessons; by

endpoint, this figure declined to 19%, with technology-integrated lessons showing particular

engagement elevation (on-task behavior during technology-integrated lessons averaged 82% at endpoint

compared to 63% for traditional teacher-lecture lessons).

Qualitative interview data revealed that devices catalyzed emotional engagement—students'

sense of classroom relevance and belonging. Teachers corroborated observational evidence of

engagement increases. Endpoint interviews across 16 of 18 teachers included statements such as:

"Students who usually don't pay attention are now engaged. When I use technology, even the struggling

students pay attention."

Engagement gains coexisted with emerging technical anxiety among some students.

Approximately 24% of students expressed frustration when devices malfunctioned, became upset when

unable to immediately solve technical problems, and occasionally avoided device-based activities.

Table 3: Student Engagement Patterns Across Implementation Phases

Engagement Indicator

Baseline

Midpoint

Endpoint

Direction

Behavioral Engagement (on-task)

53%

69%

81%

↑

Students reporting

motivation/interest in learning

38%

64%

76%

↑

Classroom participation instances

(per 45-min lesson)

8.2

14.3

16.7

↑

Students completing all homework

assignments

42%

71%

88%

↑

Reported enjoyment of school

31%

61%

74%

↑

Students requesting additional

learning resources

19%

37%

↑

Technology-related anxiety

N/A

12%

24%

↑

(negative)

Note: On-task behavior reflects average classroom observations. Homework completion based on

teacher records. Psychological indicators from structured interview questions

Theme 5: Differential Outcomes and Educational Inequality Complexities

Academic achievement data showed modest but meaningful improvement patterns. Teacher

assessments indicated overall average gains of 28% from baseline to endpoint (baseline average 58.3,

endpoint average 74.6). However, this aggregate statistic obscures critical inequality patterns.

Disaggregated analysis revealed:

• Students in top quartile of baseline achievement improved average 12 points (+16% relative

gain)

• Students in bottom quartile improved average 23 points (+61% relative gain)

• Girls improved average 19.5 points while boys improved 15.2 points

• Students with prior technology exposure demonstrated steeper learning curves

These differential gains suggest technology interventions may partially ameliorate achievement

disparities by providing previously excluded students access to learning resources and engagement

opportunities. However, analysis also reveals patterns through which technology could reinforce

advantages. High-achieving students with family support more readily converted device access into

Academy of Education Journal

Vol. 17, No. 1, Januari 2026, Page: 72-81

ISSN: 1907-2341 (Print), ISSN: 2685-4031 (Online)

Tri Handayani et.al (Bridging The Digital Divide: The....)

supplementary learning resources. Lower-achieving students without such guidance frequently used

devices for entertainment.

Theme 6: Program Sustainability Challenges and Teacher Burden

Long-term sustainability emerged as critical concern. Teachers expressed significant

uncertainty regarding program continuation: "The tablet training was good, the devices helped, but what

happens next? When the researchers leave, who will fix broken devices?"

Technical sustainability challenges included device maintenance and repair. Of 45 tablets

distributed at program initiation, by Month 18: 3 devices were non-functional; 7 required significant

repairs; and 12 experienced temporary functional disruptions. Schools expressed anxiety regarding

device replacement or repair funding.

Professional development sustainability similarly posed challenges. Teachers valued ongoing

support—monthly coaching sessions received positive feedback. Endpoint interviews included

comments such as: "I still learn something new every month. If coaching stopped, we would feel lost."

4. Conclusion

This longitudinal qualitative study examined the multifaceted processes through which

coordinated device provision and digital literacy training reshape learning opportunities, skill

development, and engagement among marginalized students in rural Indonesia. Over 18

months of implementation, the intervention generated meaningful changes: access to digital

devices and information resources expanded dramatically; students developed substantial

digital competencies progressing an average 2.13 proficiency levels; behavioral and emotional

engagement increased markedly; and academic performance improved overall with larger

relative gains for previously lower-achieving students. However, these positive patterns coexist

with important qualifications. Device provision alone proved insufficient; pedagogical

integration required substantial teacher professional development and ongoing support, with

implementation quality varying substantially across classrooms. Engagement improvements

accompanied emerging technical anxiety among some students. Most significantly, aggregate

improvements masked persistent inequality patterns. These differential outcome patterns

demonstrate that technology interventions' equity implications depend critically on institutional

implementation quality, family support conditions, and teacher pedagogical innovation. For

Indonesian policymakers implementing large-scale technology initiatives, these findings

suggest that sustained commitment to teacher professional development, curriculum adaptation,

and institutional support infrastructure determines whether technology becomes a tool for

educational equity or merely an expensive addition to inequitable systems. Investments in

devices absent complementary investments in literacy development, pedagogical capacity, and

institutional sustainability risk reproducing rather than reducing educational inequalities.

5. References

Abi, E. A., Xu, K., & Mishra, A. (2025). Digital Divide 2.0: When Digital Access Doesn’t

Translate to Digital Inclusion. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/frgmy_v1

Aboubacar Barry, Mohamed Iyas Valarthodi, Mohamad Ali, Rizqianto Hermawan, & Jafar

Ihza Yuska Azzacky. (2025). Contemporary Educational Trends in Islamic Education:

An Analytical Review of Pedagogical Challenges and Strategic Opportunities.

Academy of Education Journal

Vol. 17, No. 1, Januari 2026, Page: 72-81

ISSN: 1907-2341 (Print), ISSN: 2685-4031 (Online)

Tri Handayani et.al (Bridging The Digital Divide: The....)

LECTURES: Journal of Islamic and Education Studies, 4(3), 375–385.

https://doi.org/10.58355/lectures.v4i3.163

Aguirre-Muñoz, Z., Pando, M., & Liu, C. (2024). Enhancing Bilingual/ESL Teachers’

STEM Instruction with Targeted Content and Disciplinary Literacy Professional

Development: A Study on Knowledge and Practice Outcomes. Education Sciences,

14(7), 745. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14070745

Andrade, G., Pétrin-Pomerleau, P., & Gaudreau, P. (2025). The basic psychological needs in

excellencism and perfectionism: A dual perspective with the need-as-motives and the

need-as-nutriments frameworks. Personality and Individual Differences, 245, 113286.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2025.113286

Anisa, S., Ginashantika, E., Sudirman, S., & Olivero-Acuña, R. R. (2025). Students lived

experiences with technology in mathematics learning: a hermeneutic

phenomenological study in Indonesian secondary education. International Journal of

Mathematics and Sciences Education, 3(1), 43–56.

https://doi.org/10.59965/ijmsed.v3i1.180

Dela Peña, H.-K., & Galigao, R. (2025). Education for all: empowering individuals,

communities, and societies through access to quality learning and opportunities for

personal growth. Pantao (International Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences).

https://doi.org/10.69651/PIJHSS040218

Dr. Ranbir. (2024). Educational Technology Integration: Challenges and Opportunities.

Innovative Research Thoughts, 10(2), 75–79. https://doi.org/10.36676/irt.v10.i2.1406

Ghafarshad, L., & Sundarapandi, D. S. A. M. S. (2025). A comparative analysis of students’

perceptions of online and hybrid learning models during the COVID-19 pandemic.

International Journal of Science and Research Archive, 16(1), 683–686.

https://doi.org/10.30574/ijsra.2025.16.1.2058

Hafeez, S., Shahzad, K., & De Silva, M. (2025). Enhancing digital transformation in SMEs:

The dynamic capabilities of innovation intermediaries within ecosystems. Long Range

Planning, 58(3), 102525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2025.102525

Imaduddin, F., & Firdaus, M. (2025). Bridging the Digital Divide: Theoritical Perspectives

on ICT Integration in Indonesian Education Policy. International Journal Of

Education, Social Studies, And Management (IJESSM), 5(2), 895–908.

https://doi.org/10.52121/ijessm.v5i2.806

Lertlam, K., Sirisuthi, C., & Prasertporn, V. (2024). Program Development for Enhancing

Teachers’ Competencies in Teaching Railway Control and Maintenance in Vocational

Colleges under the Office of Vocational Education Commission. International

Education Studies, 17(4), 16. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v17n4p16

Tanggu Mara, A. A. P., Surjono, H. D., & Yuniarti, N. (2025). Progressive Web

Applications as a Tool to Achieve SDG 4 and SDG 8: Evidence from Vocational

Schools in Marginalized Regions. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202511.1973.v1

Wang, Z. (2025). Current Status and Trends of Blue Economy Development in Indonesia:

Policy Direction, Practice-driven Approaches, and Regional Collaboration. Advances

in Economics and Management Research, 14(1), 282.

https://doi.org/10.56028/aemr.14.1.282.2025

Academy of Education Journal

Vol. 17, No. 1, Januari 2026, Page: 72-81

ISSN: 1907-2341 (Print), ISSN: 2685-4031 (Online)

Tri Handayani et.al (Bridging The Digital Divide: The....)

Weltler, P., Harbich, P. F., Burger, A., Dobner, S., Kaufmann, C. C., Geppert, A., Huber, K.,

& Pogran, E. (2025). The COR Lipid Registry: the effectiveness of the strike early and

strike strong strategy in patients with high cardiovascular risk. European Heart

Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjacc/zuaf137

Zakir, S., Hoque, M. E., Susanto, P., Nisaa, V., Alam, M. K., Khatimah, H., & Mulyani, E.

(2025). Digital literacy and academic performance: the mediating roles of digital

informal learning, self-efficacy, and students’ digital competence. Frontiers in

Education, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1590274