Review Article

A scoping review of contemporary frameworks, challenges, and future directions on educational technology for digital generations

Oksana K. Korobkova 1 * , Natalya A. Galchenko 2 , Natalia A. Orekhovskaya 3 , Ekaterina A. Drozdova 4 , Oksana V. Zakharova 5 , Alisa V. Lobuteva 5
More Detail
1 Pacific National University, Khabarovsk, RUSSIA2 Murmansk Arctic University, Murmansk, RUSSIA3 Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, RUSSIA4 Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University), Moscow, RUSSIA5 I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, RUSSIA* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(4), October 2025, ep611, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/17517
Published: 05 December 2025
OPEN ACCESS   415 Views   254 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

This study is a thorough scoping review that seeks to thoroughly delineate the existing frameworks, difficulties, and prospective trajectories of educational technology for digital generations. Utilizing the technique established by Arksey and O’Malley (2005), a systematic search was conducted for English-language studies published between 2016 and 2025 in the WoS and Scopus databases, resulting in the inclusion of 46 publications in the analysis. The results show that technology acceptance models (TAM and UTAUT) (19 studies) are the most common in the field of educational technology. These models were established during the X-Y generation period and do not fully reflect the realities of digital generations. Digital learning infrastructures (n = 29) and mobile-social learning ecosystems (n = 22) were recognized as the predominant technological categories. The study revealed that the digital divide has intensified since the epidemic (28% lack Internet access), shortcomings in teacher preparedness constitute the principal obstacle to technological integration, and adaptive learning methods exhibit moderate to substantial impact sizes. The results underscore the necessity for the formulation of novel theoretical frameworks that encapsulate the inherent technology interaction patterns of digital generations, pedagogy-oriented technology integration, and holistic digital equity initiatives.
Keywords: educational technology, digital generation, Gen Z, Gen alpha, scoping review

CITATION (APA)

Korobkova, O. K., Galchenko, N. A., Orekhovskaya, N. A., Drozdova, E. A., Zakharova, O. V., & Lobuteva, A. V. (2025). A scoping review of contemporary frameworks, challenges, and future directions on educational technology for digital generations. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(4), ep611. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/17517

REFERENCES

  1. Abd El-Sattar, H. K. H. (2023). A new learning theory-based framework for combining flow state with game elements to promote engagement and learning in serious games. Information Sciences Letters, 12(56), 2663-2677.
  2. Abu Seman, S. A., Hashim, M. J., Mohd Roslin, R., & Mohd Ishar, N. I. (2018). Millennial learners’ acceptance and satisfaction of blended learning environment. In Proceedings of the International Conference on University Learning and Teaching. https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v15i3.7845
  3. Acosta-Enriquez, B. G., Arbulú Ballesteros, M. A., Arbulu Perez Vargas, C. G., Orellana Ulloa, M. N., Gutiérrez Ulloa, C. R., Pizarro Romero, J. M., Gutiérrez Jaramillo, N. D., Cuenca Orellana, H. U., Ayala Anzoátegui, D. X., & López Roca, C. (2024). Knowledge, attitudes, and perceived Ethics regarding the use of ChatGPT among Generation Z university students. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 20, Article 10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-024-00157-4
  4. AECT. (2020). AECT definition for educational technology. ACET. https://www.aect.org/aect/about/aect-definition
  5. Ahmed, V., & Opoku, A. (2022). Technology supported learning and pedagogy in times of crisis: The case of COVID-19 pandemic. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 365-405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10706-w
  6. Alrawashdeh, G. S., Fyffe, S., Azevedo, R. F. L., & Castillo, N. M. (2024). Exploring the impact of personalized and adaptive learning technologies on reading literacy: A global meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 42, Article 100587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100587
  7. Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
  8. Armstrong, C., Roodt, S., & Mulaji, S. M. (2022). Using digital game-based learning to engage the net generation of students in higher education: Lecturers’ perceptions in South Africa. In Proceedings of the 2022 3rd International Conference on Next Generation Computing Applications. https://doi.org/10.1109/NextComp55567.2022.9932253
  9. Assefa, Y., Gebremeskel, M. M., Moges, B. T., Tilwani, S. A., & Azmera, Y. A. (2024). Rethinking the digital divide and associated educational in(equity) in higher education in the context of developing countries: The social justice perspective. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 42(1), 15-32. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijilt-03-2024-0058
  10. Bagdi, H., Bulsara, H. P., Sankar, D., & Sharma, L. (2023). The transition from traditional to digital: Factors that propel Generation Z’s adoption of online learning. International Journal of Educational Management, 37(3), 695-717. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijem-01-2023-0003
  11. Barry, D. S., Marzouk, F., Chulak-Oglu, K., Bennett, D., Tierney, P., & O’Keeffe, G. W. (2016). Anatomy education for the YouTube generation. Anatomical Sciences Education, 9(1), 90-96. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1550
  12. Beaudoin, L., & Avanthey, L. (2022). How to help digital-native students to successfully take control of their learning: A return of 8 years of experience on a computer science e-learning platform in higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 28(5), 5421-5451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11407-8
  13. Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.x
  14. Blundell, C. N., Mukherjee, M., & Nykvist, S. (2022). A scoping review of the application of the SAMR model in research. Computers and Education Open, 3, Article 100093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100093
  15. Buckley, P., Doyle, E., & Doyle, S. (2017). Game on! Students’ perceptions of gamified learning. Educational Technology & Society, 20(3), 1-10.
  16. Caratozzolo, P., Alvarez-Delgado, A., & Sirkis, G. (2021). Fostering digital literacy through active learning in engineering education. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. 1-6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE49875.2021.9637304
  17. Castro, A., Trindade, R., & Pereira, T. (2022). Proof of concept teaching for 21st century digital literacy in Portugal: A pedagogical approach towards a new educational model. In D. Passey, D., Leahy, L. Williams, J. Holvikivi, & M. Ruohonen, M. (Eds.), Digital transformation of education and learning–Past, present and future. OCCE 2021. IFIP advances in information and communication technology, vol 642 (pp. 168-178). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97986-7_14
  18. Chan, C. K. Y., & Lee, K. K. W. (2023). The AI generation gap: Are Gen Z students more interested in adopting generative AI such as ChatGPT in teaching and learning than their Gen X and millennial generation teachers? Smart Learning Environments, 10, Article 60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00269-3
  19. Chardonnens, S. (2025). Adapting educational practices for Generation Z: Integrating metacognitive strategies and artificial intelligence. Frontiers in Education, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1504726
  20. Cheng, X., Sun, J., & Zarifis, A. (2020). Artificial intelligence and deep learning in educational technology research and practice. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(5), 1653-1656. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13018
  21. Chong, M. M., Subramanian, P., Ting, M., & Ying, L. J. (2024). An investigation into the perception of Gen Z students in higher education towards gamification techniques in learning computing subjects. In Proceedings of the 2024 International Visualization, Informatics and Technology Conference. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVIT62102.2024.10692814
  22. Coldwell-Neilson, J. (2018). Digital literacy expectations in higher education. In M. Campbell, J. Willems, C. Adachi, D. Blake, I. Doherty, S. Krishnan, S. Macfarlane, L. Ngo, M. O’Donnell, S. Palmer, L. Riddell, I. Story, H. Suri, & J. Tai (Eds.), Open oceans: Learning without borders. Proceedings ASCILITE 2018 Geelong (pp. 103-112). ASCILITE Publications. https://doi.org/10.14742/apubs.2018.1922
  23. Contrino, M. F., Reyes-Millán, M., Vázquez-Villegas, P., & Membrillo-Hernández, J. (2024). Using an adaptive learning tool to improve student performance and satisfaction in online and face-to-face education for a more personalized approach. Smart Learning Environments, 11, Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00292-y
  24. Cripps, T. (2020). We are mobile magicians but digital refugees: Helping prospective English teachers explore technology and ubiquitous learning. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 17(S1), 168-189. https://doi.org/10.56040/tncp171a
  25. Cuevas-Ortuño, J., & Zavala, A. (2024). Combining discrete-event simulation with the metaverse to motivate students in higher education. In Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (pp. 1-5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON60312.2024.10578770
  26. Demir, M. (2024). A taxonomy of social media for learning. Computers & Education, 218, Article 105091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105091
  27. Di Pietro, G., & Castaño Muñoz, J. (2025). A meta-analysis on the effect of technology on the achievement of less advantaged students. Computers & Education, 226, 105197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105197
  28. Dron, J. (2021). Educational technology: What it is and how it works. AI & SOCIETY, 37, 155-166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01195-z
  29. Efiloğlu Kurt, Ö. (2022). Learning with smartphones: The acceptance of m-learning in higher education. Online Information Review, 47(5), 862-879. https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-10-2021-0516
  30. Fitriati, A., Anggoro, S., Talib, C. A., & Toh, T. L. (2025). The intention of Generation Z to use mobile learning: The role of self-efficacy and enjoyment. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 26(1), 85-100. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.1445234
  31. Golden, A. R., Srisarajivakul, E. N., Hasselle, A. J., Pfund, R. A., & Knox, J. (2023). What was a gap is now a chasm: Remote schooling, the digital divide, and educational inequities resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. Current Opinion in Psychology, 52, Article 101632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101632
  32. Granic, A. (2022). Educational technology adoption: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 9725-9744. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10951-7
  33. Guerra-Nunez, O. (2017). The use of digital educational technology and third spaces with foreign-born Latinos. Journal of Latinos and Education, 16(4), 323-337. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2016.1257426
  34. Gulatee, Y., & Combes, B. (2018). Are you sure this generation are digital natives? Case study: Thailand and Australia. In Proceedings of the 2018 5th International Symposium on Emerging Trends and Technologies in Libraries and Information Services. https://doi.org/10.1109/ETTLIS.2018.8485254
  35. Gulateee, Y., Pagram, J., & Combes, B. (2018). Which tech will I use? Trends in students’ use and ownership of technology in a Thai university, an ongoing study. Journal of ICT Research and Applications, 12(2), 138-153. https://doi.org/10.5614/itbj.ict.res.appl.2018.12.2.3
  36. Hammad, H. S. (2025). Teaching the digital natives: Examining the learning needs and preferences of Gen Z learners in higher education. Transcultural Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(2), 214-242. https://doi.org/10.21608/tjhss.2025.346098.1303
  37. Höfrová, A., Balidemaj, V., & Small, M. A. (2024). A systematic literature review of education for Generation alpha. Discover Education, 3, Article 125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00218-3
  38. Huss, J. A. (2023). Gen Z students are filling our online classrooms: Do our teaching methods need a reboot? InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching, 18, 101-112. https://doi.org/10.46504/18202306hu
  39. Jukic, R., & Skojo, T. (2021). The educational needs of the alpha Generation. In Proceedings of the 2021 44th International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology. https://doi.org/10.23919/MIPRO52101.2021.9597106
  40. Kim, H. J., Hong, A. J., & Song, H.-D. (2019). The roles of academic engagement and digital readiness in students’ achievements in university e-learning environments. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16, Article 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0152-3
  41. Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 135-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001
  42. Kus, M. (2025). A meta-analysis of the impact of technology related factors on students’ academic performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1524645
  43. Lahuerta-Otero, E., Cordero-Gutiérrez, R., & Izquierdo-Álvarez, V. (2018). Like it or die. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality. https://doi.org/10.1145/3284179.3284336
  44. Lahuerta-Otero, E., Cordero-Gutiérrez, R., & Izquierdo-Álvarez, V. (2019). Using social media to enhance learning and motivate students in the higher education classroom. In L. Uden, D. Liberona, G. Sanchez, & S. Rodríguez-González (Eds.), Learning technology for education challenges. LTEC 2019. Communications in computer and information science, vol 1011 (pp. 351-361). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20798-4_30
  45. Lee, K., & Fanguy, M. (2022). Online exam proctoring technologies: Educational innovation or deterioration? British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(3), 475-490. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13182
  46. Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O’Brien, K. K. (2010). Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implementation Science, 5, Article 69. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69
  47. Li, Z., Zhou, M., & Teo, T. (2017). Mobile technology in dance education: A case study of three Canadian high school dance programs. Research in Dance Education, 19(2), 183-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647893.2017.1370449
  48. Marcus, V., Masrahi, A., & Motamedi, S. (2022). Generation Z and e-learning: COVID-19, personality, and technology acceptance. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181322661183
  49. Martin, F., Long, S., Haywood, K., & Xie, K. (2025). Digital distractions in education: A systematic review of research on causes, consequences and prevention strategies. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-025-10550-6
  50. Matijević, M., Topolovčan, T., & Rajić, V. (2017). Nastavničke procjene upotrebe digitalnih medija i konstruktivističke nastave u primarnom i sekundarnom obrazovanju [Teachers’ assessments of the use of digital media and constructivist teaching in primary and secondary education]. Croatian Journal of Education, 19(2). https://doi.org/10.15516/cje.v19i2.2411
  51. McGrew, S. (2024). Teaching lateral reading: Interventions to help people read like fact checkers. Current Opinion in Psychology, 55, Article 101737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101737
  52. Meet, R. K., Kala, D., & Al-Adwan, A. S. (2022). Exploring factors affecting the adoption of MOOC in Generation Z using extended UTAUT2 model. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 10261-10283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11052-1
  53. Mehmood, R., Alam, F., Albogami, N. N., Katib, I., Albeshri, A., & Altowaijri, S. M. (2017). UTiLearn: A personalised ubiquitous teaching and learning system for smart societies. IEEE Access, 5, 2615-2635. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2017.2668840
  54. Mhlongo, S., Mbatha, K., Ramatsetse, B., & Dlamini, R. (2023). Challenges, opportunities, and prospects of adopting and using smart digital technologies in learning environments: An iterative review. Heliyon, 9(6), Article e16348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16348
  55. Moltudal, S. H., Krumsvik, R. J., & Høydal, K. L. (2022). Adaptive learning technology in primary education: Implications for professional teacher knowledge and classroom management. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.830536
  56. Motamedi, S., & Marcus, V. (2024). Impact of students’ backgrounds on online learning behavior: Generation Z technology acceptance of e-learning technology during COVID-19. In Proceedings of the 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--47564
  57. Motamedi, S., Marquis, K., & Levine, H. (2021). Understanding e-learning acceptance of Gen Z students: An extension of the technology acceptance model (TAM). In Proceedings of the 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--37956
  58. Muchsini, B., Siswandari, Joyoatmojo, S., & Wiranto. (2021). Exploring perceived fits, attitudes, and self-efficacy: A case of digital natives’ online learning behavior. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1842, Article 012013. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1842/1/012013
  59. Mutimukwe, C., Viberg, O., Oberg, L. M., & Cerratto-Pargman, T. (2022). Students’ privacy concerns in learning analytics: Model development. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(4), 932-951. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13234
  60. Napaporn, S., Maneewan, S., Thamwipat, K., & Nittayathammakul, V. (2023). The cloud-powered hybrid learning process to enhance digital natives’ analytical reading skills. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.14569/ijacsa.2023.0140168
  61. Nistor, N., Stanciu, D., Lerche, T., & Kiel, E. (2019). “I am fine with any technology, as long as it doesn’t make trouble, so that I can concentrate on my study”: A case study of university students’ attitude strength related to educational technology acceptance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2557-2571. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12832
  62. Nordin, H., Singh, D., Mansor, Z., & Yadegaridehkordi, E. (2022). Impact of power distance cultural dimension in e-learning interface design among Malaysian Generation Z students. IEEE Access, 10, 64199-64208. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2022.3183117
  63. Onjewu, A.-K. E., Godwin, E. S., Azizsafaei, F., & Appiah, D. (2024). The influence of technology use on learning skills among Generation Z: A gender and cross-country analysis. Industry and Higher Education, 39(2), 139-157. https://doi.org/10.1177/09504222241263227
  64. Opesemowo, O. A. G., & Adekomaya, V. (2024). Harnessing artificial intelligence for advancing sustainable development goals in South Africa’s higher education system: A qualitative study. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(3), 67-86. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.3.4
  65. Petrovic, O. (2017). D-move: A mobile communication based Delphi for digital natives to support embedded research. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference Mobile Learning 2017.
  66. Phillips, T., & Ozogul, G. (2020). Learning analytics research in relation to educational technology: Capturing learning analytics contributions with bibliometric analysis. TechTrends, 64(6), 878-886. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00519-y
  67. Pierce, G. L., & Cleary, P. F. (2024). The persistent educational digital divide and its impact on societal inequality. PLoS ONE, 19(4), Article e0286795. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0286795
  68. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 2: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424843
  69. Rangel-Pérez, C., Gato-Bermúdez, M.-J., Musicco-Nombela, D., & Ruiz-Alberdi, C. (2021). The massive implementation of ICT in universities and its implications for ensuring SDG 4: Challenges and difficulties for professors. Sustainability, 13(22), Article 12871. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212871
  70. Reid, L., Button, D., & Brommeyer, M. (2023). Challenging the myth of the digital native: A narrative review. Nursing Reports, 13(2), 573-600. https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep13020052
  71. Rimanelli, M., & Gurba, K. (2019). Gaming in education and e-learning: Mock-trials, mock-elections and crisis-simulations for political sciences and communications courses. In Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning 2019. https://doi.org/10.33965/el2019_201909F030
  72. Rønningsbakk, L. (2020). Digital natives and educational traditions. What changes when exchanging textbook content with Internet search? In T. C. Huang, T. T. Wu, J. Barroso, F. E. Sandnes, P. Martins, & Y. M. Huang (Eds.), Innovative technologies and learning. ICITL 2020. Lecture notes in computer science(), vol 12555 (pp. 547-556). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63885-6_59
  73. Sayavaranont, P., Piriyasurawong, P., & Jeerungsuwan, N. (2018). Enhancing Thai Generation Z’s creative thinking with Scratch through the spiral model. International Journal of Learning Technology, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.1504/ijlt.2018.095961
  74. Selwyn, N. (2009). The digital native–Myth and reality. Aslib Proceedings, 61(4), 364-379. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530910973776
  75. Sergeeva, O. V., Zheltukhina, M. R., & Demir, S. (2025). From assistance to integrity: Exploring the role of AI in academic communication across Russian and Turkish campuses. Frontiers in Communication, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2025.1479813
  76. Soomro, K. A., Kale, U., Curtis, R., Akcaoglu, M., & Bernstein, M. (2020). Digital divide among higher education faculty. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, Article 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00191-5
  77. Šorgo, A., Bartol, T., Dolničar, D., & Boh Podgornik, B. (2016). Attributes of digital natives as predictors of information literacy in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(3), 749-767. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12451
  78. Stoltz, J. H., Bunt, B., & van Zyl, S. (2025). Leveling up learning: Enhancing self-directed learning in computer applications technology with Classcraft. Education Sciences, 15(2), Article 180. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020180
  79. Strelan, P., Osborn, A., & Palmer, E. (2020). The flipped classroom: A meta-analysis of effects on student performance across disciplines and education levels. Educational Research Review, 30, Article 100314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100314
  80. Strielkowski, W., Grebennikova, V., Lisovskiy, A., Rakhimova, G., & Vasileva, T. (2024). AI-driven adaptive learning for sustainable educational transformation. Sustainable Development, 33(2), 1921-1947. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3221
  81. Szymkowiak, A., Melović, B., Dabić, M., Jeganathan, K., & Kundi, G. S. (2021). Information technology and Gen Z: The role of teachers, the Internet, and technology in the education of young people. Technology in Society, 65, Article 101565. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101565
  82. Tick, A. (2018). IT security as a special awareness at the analysis of the digital/e-learning acceptance strategies of the early Z Generation. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 22nd International Conference on Intelligent Engineering Systems (pp. 45-50). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/INES.2018.8523964
  83. Toothaker, R. (2018). Millennial’s perspective of clicker technology in a nursing classroom: A mixed methods research study. Nurse Education Today, 62, 80-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.12.027
  84. Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., … Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467-473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850
  85. van de Werfhorst, H. G., Kessenich, E., & Geven, S. (2022). The digital divide in online education: Inequality in digital readiness of students and schools. Computers and Education Open, 3, Article 100100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100100
  86. Van Wyk, B. (2022). New kids on the block? Exploring technological preferences of a new generation. European Conference on e-Learning, 21(1), 432-437. https://doi.org/10.34190/ecel.21.1.446
  87. Vedechkina, M., & Borgonovi, F. (2021). A review of evidence on the role of digital technology in shaping attention and cognitive control in children. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.611155
  88. Vizcaya-Moreno, M. F., & Perez-Canaveras, R. M. (2020). Social media used and teaching methods preferred by Generation Z students in the nursing clinical learning environment: A cross-sectional research study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), Article 8267. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218267
  89. Wang, C., Chen, X., Yu, T., Liu, Y., & Jing, Y. (2024a). Education reform and change driven by digital technology: A bibliometric study from a global perspective. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, Article 256. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02717-y
  90. Wang, P., & Ko, J. (2022). ICT competency and practicum of preservice teachers as digital natives: A mixed-method study. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 44(4), 901-916. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2022.2083581
  91. Wang, X., Huang, R. T., Sommer, M., Pei, B., Shidfar, P., Rehman, M. S., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Martin, F. (2024b). The efficacy of artificial intelligence-enabled adaptive learning systems from 2010 to 2022 on learner outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(6), 1348-1383. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331241240459
  92. Wang, X., Hui, L., Jiang, X., & Chen, Y. (2022). Online English learning engagement among digital natives: The mediating role of self-regulation. Sustainability, 14(23), Article 15661. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315661
  93. Wu, K.-C., Chen, C.-C., Chiu, T.-H., & Chiang, I. J. (2017). Transform children’s library into a mixed-reality learning environment: Using smartwatch navigation and information visualization interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2017 Pacific Neighborhood Consortium Annual Conference and Joint Meetings. https://doi.org/10.23919/PNC.2017.8203526
  94. Wu, Q. (2021). Networking college’s smart education system based on omnidirectional interaction model. In Proceedings of the 2021 2nd International Conference on Information Science and Education. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICISE-IE53922.2021.00039
  95. Wu, X.-Y. (2023). Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: A meta-analysis. Education and Information Technologies, 29(1), 425-458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12307-1
  96. Yalçın-İncik, E., & İncik, T. (2022). Generation Z students’ views on technology in education: What they want what they get. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(2), 109-124. https://doi.org/10.52380/mojet.2022.10.2.275
  97. Yeung, K. L., Carpenter, S. K., & Corral, D. (2021). A comprehensive review of educational technology on objective learning outcomes in academic contexts. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1583-1630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09592-4
  98. Zhuang, R., Yang, J., Li, B., Zhang, Y., & Huang, R. (2016). The framework of digital learning capacity for digital natives. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 386-390). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2016.130