INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
Toward Inclusive Digital Teaching in Malaysia: Challenges,  
Strategies, and Future Directions  
Azlin Azman1, Abdul Majeed Ahmad1, Tika Widiastuti2, Himmatul Kholidah3, Hafizah Besar Sa’aid1*  
1Faculty of Business and Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Kedah Branch, Sungai  
Petani Campus, Merbok, Kedah, Malaysia  
2Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia  
3Faculty of Vocational Studies, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia  
*Corresponding Author  
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.910000619  
Received: 28 October 2025; Accepted: 04 November 2025; Published: 19 November 2025  
ABSTRACT  
This study synthesizes equity- and accessibility-oriented approaches to digital teaching in Malaysian higher  
education and proposes a qualitative design to validate and extend the synthesis. The objectives are to (i) map  
persistent challenges limiting equitable participation in digital learning, (ii) consolidate practical strategies  
currently used by institutions and lecturers, and (iii) outline future directions that align with national policy  
(RMK-12, MyDIGITAL, and the Digital Education Policy). A narrative review of recent scholarship (2020–  
2025) and sector reports was conducted and organized into four domains—Technical, Pedagogical, Engagement,  
and Assessment & Feedback. The proposed empirical component comprises two purposively sampled focus  
groups with experienced lecturers using a semi-structured protocol; transcripts will be analysed through reflexive  
thematic analysis with double-coding to enhance coherence. The synthesis highlights recurring technical  
constraints (unstable internet, device shortages, digital divide), limited digital-pedagogy capacity and uneven  
UDL adoption, online isolation and low social presence, and assessment pressures linked to academic integrity  
and low-personalization feedback. Cross-cutting, evidence-informed strategies include low-bandwidth and  
offline contingencies, device-loan schemes and IT helpdesks, continuous professional development with  
mentoring, inclusive course design, interactive LMS with peer projects and breakout rooms, and formative/peer  
assessment with multimodal feedback. Future directions prioritize centres of excellence for teaching and  
learning, AI-enabled teaching assistants and adaptive/personalised learning within robust governance,  
institution-wide accessibility responsibilities and universal standards, predictive analytics for timely support,  
and QA rubrics that integrate integrity-by-design. Collectively, the framework provides a practicable roadmap  
that links immediate classroom tactics to institutional systems change. The forthcoming focus groups are  
expected to contextualize feasibility, surface discipline-specific nuances, and refine priorities for scalable,  
policy-aligned implementation in Malaysian universities.  
Keywords: Digital equity; accessibility; higher education (Malaysia); digital pedagogy; assessment and  
academic integrity  
INTRODUCTION  
The importance of digital innovations in education and their connection to equity and accessibility in teaching  
is a global phenomenon. Any form of education backed by cutting-edge technologies or pedagogical practices  
that efficiently use technology is called digital teaching (Breen, 2018). Digital teaching innovation is the latest  
tool or idea that aims to balance and improve equity and access to education for all, regardless of their  
background. The goal of equity in education is to give every student the same opportunity to acquire important  
skills and knowledge that will enable them to lead fulfilling lives and make positive contributions to society  
(Hidayat Ali et al., 2024). Accessibility in education ensures that everyone has equal access to educational  
Page 7591  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
opportunities, resources, and services, regardless of whether they have a disability or not. This matter should be  
considered and prioritized in the context of digital teaching.  
Therefore, both aspects related to digital teaching and learning need to complement each other. It refers to any  
form of instruction that is supported by cutting-edge technologies or pedagogical strategies that make efficient  
use of the technology. Digital education innovations can be described as state-of-the-art technologies or ideas  
that improve access and equity to both teaching and learning (Choi-Lundberg et al., 2023). According to  
Timotheou et al. (2023), digital education can help educators and students bridge the achievement gap, but it can  
also exacerbate already-existing gaps and make it more difficult for educators to help students from  
disadvantaged groups to thrive in educational institutions.  
Furthermore, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic dwindle in comparison to the disruptions anticipated by  
strong new technologies, as well as the risks and the "right" role for the institution in implementing digital  
education innovation is a crucial matter, as important as the governments who play significant roles in  
encouraging innovation ecosystems nationwide (Ahmed et al., 2022; Coleman, 2021; Resta & Laferrière, 2008).  
In the Malaysian context, although initiatives to speed up innovation and technology adoption, as well as to  
enhance digital infrastructure and services, were made during the Eleventh Plan, there are still a number of issues  
to be resolved. The delayed development of the digital economy, which is primarily caused by a lack of  
infrastructure and disjointed governance and contributed to the expansion of the digital divide, is one of the  
problems associated with digitalization. This problem is further compounded by the fact that low-income people  
cannot buy digital services. Efforts to implement cutting-edge technology in embracing 4IR were impeded by  
low technology acceptance, insufficient investment in Research & Development, Commercialization &  
Innovation, and a skills shortage (EPU, 2021). Hence, Malaysia, through its Twelve Plan (2021-2025), aims to  
decrease the digital divide by focusing on equity and accessibility of digital transformation and innovation by  
having the Malaysian Digital Economy Blueprint. It is built upon three primary pillars: strengthening security,  
well-being, and inclusiveness; resetting the economy; and enhancing sustainability. In order to promote these  
themes and pave the path towards a successful, inclusive, and sustainable nation, the four policy enablers are  
concentrated on strengthening public services, accelerating the adoption and innovation of new technologies,  
enhancing connectivity and transportation infrastructure, and nurturing future talent. In terms of speeding up  
innovation and technology adoption for its citizens, Malaysia's development process has entered a new phase  
with the implementation of Policy Enabler 2: Accelerating Innovation and Technology Adoption and Game  
Changer XI: Enhancing Digital Connectivity for Inclusive Development (EPU, 2021)  
Although the number of internet users and the internet penetration rate in Malaysia in January 2025 has reached  
34.9 million users with a penetration rate of 97.7% (Kemp, 2025), the issue of equity and accessibility to digital  
education still requires attention from all stakeholders, especially the government and educators. The focus of  
this study is on the challenges, strategies, and future directions that may be crucial in promoting the best practices  
in integrating digital education in higher education, given the abundance of studies examining the concerns and  
problems related to equality and accessibility in it. Thus, this conceptual paper examines possible challenges,  
strategies, and future prospects in order to address equity and accessibility in the context of digital teaching  
innovation in education.  
LITERATURE REVIEW  
The literature review will discuss the challenges, strategies, and future directions of digital innovations in  
education and their connection to equity and accessibility in teaching, and then will look into future directions  
and how the topic is relevant to government policy.  
Challenges, Strategies, and Future Directions  
The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted education systems worldwide, forcing many educational institutions to  
adopt digital teaching methods to ensure continuity of learning (Bozkurt et al., 2020). While digital teaching  
offers many benefits, it also poses significant challenges for academicians. This conceptual paper explores the  
Page 7592  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
challenges of digital teaching for academicians to promote equity and accessibility for all, and discusses  
strategies and future directions for addressing these challenges.  
Recent work continues to emphasise accessibility and inclusion as core to equity in digital teaching. A  
comprehensive review of 91 sources synthesised three major themes—barriers to learning online, frameworks  
for accessible and inclusive online learning, and responsibility for accessibility—offering concrete implications  
for practice in higher education (Lomellini et al., 2025). Complementing this, research from low-resource  
contexts underscores how equitable access to learning and assessment requires redesign of modalities and  
support systems, not only device provision (Dawadi et al., 2024).  
Challenges of Digital Teaching for Academicians  
The following are some of the key challenges faced by academicians in digital teaching:  
Technical Challenges  
One of the key challenges is providing stable and reliable internet connectivity for both educators and students  
(Al-Fraihat et al., 2020). Academic institutions need to ensure that both educators and students have access to  
high-speed internet to facilitate seamless online learning. The lack of stable internet can lead to disruptions in  
learning and affect students' overall learning experience (Dong et al., 2021). Technical support is another  
important consideration for academic institutions to effectively address the technical challenges of digital  
teaching (Bozkurt et al., 2020). Akpen et al., (2024) suggest that academic institutions need to provide adequate  
technical support to both educators and students to ensure the effective delivery of online education. This support  
can include IT support teams, online training sessions, and resource centres.  
Pedagogical Challenges  
Maintaining student engagement and motivation is another challenge of digital teaching. Research consistently  
finds that the absence of physical presence and face-to-face interaction in online learning environments can lead  
to decreased student engagement, increased feelings of isolation, and reduced motivation (Hollister et al., 2022).  
Students often report less immediate feedback, diminished social presence, and fewer opportunities for  
spontaneous interaction, all of which can hinder their willingness to participate and their sense of belonging  
(Xiao et al., 2024). Traditional assessment methods, such as exams and essays, are often inadequate for online  
learning. Effective digital education requires alternative assessment strategies and that academics develop new  
technological, pedagogical, and assessment skills to ensure quality and engagement in virtual environments (Al-  
Maqbali & Al-Shamsi, 2023). As noted by Hodges et al. (2020), many academics lack the necessary skills and  
experience to effectively use digital technologies in teaching.  
Students’ Engagement Challenges  
Student engagement can be a challenge, as digital teaching can create a sense of isolation and reduce interaction  
(Fernandes et al., 2014). Multiple studies confirm that students transitioning from traditional classrooms to  
online environments frequently experience decreased engagement and motivation. This is primarily attributed  
to the lack of spontaneous interaction, diminished sense of community, and fewer collaborative opportunities  
online (Rajan et al., 2024; Akpen et al., 2024; Eden et al., 2022). Similarly, Bozkurt et al. (2020) identified the  
lack of social presence as a significant challenge in online education. The absence of nonverbal cues, such as  
facial expressions and body language, made it difficult for students to connect with their peers and instructors,  
which in turn affected their engagement in the learning process.  
Student engagement literature has also advanced. A 2025 meta‑analysis reports that social presence remains a  
significant predictor of engagement and learning outcomes in online higher education, reinforcing the need for  
intentional community‑building and interaction design within LMS‑mediated courses (Mykota, 2025).  
Page 7593  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
Assessment and Feedback Challenges  
Assessment and feedback can also be problematic in digital teaching environments. One of the main challenges  
of digital assessment is ensuring academic integrity. Li and Lalani (2020) note that the lack of face-to-face  
supervision and proctoring can make it difficult to prevent cheating and plagiarism in digital assessments.  
Another challenge is providing timely and meaningful feedback to students. As Lee and Choi (2021) point out,  
digital feedback can often be impersonal and lack the nuance and depth of face-to-face feedback. Digital  
assessment and feedback also require careful consideration of accessibility and inclusivity. As Ayasrah et al.  
(2023) note, digital tools and platforms can present barriers to students with disabilities or those from diverse  
backgrounds. Academics can address this by ensuring that assessments and feedback are designed with  
accessibility in mind, such as providing alternative formats and ensuring compatibility with assistive  
technologies.  
Strategies for Addressing Challenges  
The following are some of the effective strategies for addressing the challenges of digital teaching:  
Professional Development  
One approach to professional development is to provide ongoing training and support for educators as they adapt  
to new digital teaching methods and tools. Sims et al., (2023) suggest that this approach can be particularly  
effective when it is tailored to the needs of individual educators and incorporates opportunities for reflection and  
feedback. They also highlight the importance of creating a supportive and collaborative learning environment  
that encourages educators to experiment with new approaches and learn from one another.  
Another effective strategy for professional development is to promote a culture of lifelong learning among  
educators. This includes providing opportunities for educators to pursue advanced degrees or certifications in  
digital teaching, as well as encouraging them to engage in ongoing self-directed learning and professional  
networking (Bozkurt et al., 2020). By promoting a culture of continuous learning, educators are better equipped  
to stay up-to-date with the latest digital teaching technologies and trends, and are better able to adapt to changing  
circumstances as they arise.  
In addition, mentoring and coaching can be valuable professional development strategies for educators,  
particularly when they are paired with opportunities for hands-on learning and experimentation (Geletu, 2023).  
Mentoring and coaching can provide educators with personalized support and guidance as they navigate the  
challenges of digital teaching and can help them build the skills and confidence necessary to implement new  
approaches and technologies effectively.  
Course Design  
Course design includes the use of multimedia materials and active learning strategies, which can also enhance  
digital teaching. AlRawi and AlKahtani (2021) suggest that course materials should be designed with a Universal  
Design for Learning (UDL) framework, which takes into account the diverse needs of students with different  
learning styles and abilities. This requires incorporating a range of multimedia elements, such as videos,  
podcasts, and interactive quizzes, to engage students and present information in different ways.  
Additionally, designing effective digital courses requires a focus on creating engaging and interactive learning  
experiences. As noted by Chima et al. (2024), instructors must carefully design their courses to provide  
opportunities for student collaboration and active participation, as well as to foster a sense of community among  
learners in online environments. This can be accomplished through a range of strategies, including the use of  
breakout rooms, online forums, and collaborative projects.  
Furthermore, Fuentes, Newton and Reed (2021) highlighted the importance of designing online courses that  
align with students' needs and preferences in order to enhance engagement. They noted that the one-size-fits-all  
approach to online education often fails to cater to the diverse learning styles and backgrounds of students,  
leading to disengagement and low retention rates.  
Page 7594  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
Finally, designing effective digital courses requires ongoing professional development for instructors. As noted  
by Haarala-Muhonen et al., (2023), instructors must be trained in the use of digital tools and technologies, as  
well as in effective teaching strategies for online and hybrid environments. This requires ongoing support and  
training from academic institutions, as well as opportunities for instructors to engage in peer learning and  
collaboration.  
Communication and Support  
Providing clear and detailed instructions for accessing and using online platforms can help overcome  
connectivity issues (Al-Fraihat et al., 2020). Additionally, academic institutions can provide technical support  
services to both educators and students to address technical issues and ensure a seamless learning experience  
(Rostami et al., 2021).  
Besides that, academicians should use synchronous and asynchronous communication tools. Asynchronous tools  
such as discussion forums and email allow for students to communicate at their own pace, while synchronous  
tools such as videoconferencing and instant messaging enable real-time interaction and feedback (Moorhouse &  
Wong, 2022). By utilizing a combination of these tools, educators can create a supportive learning environment  
that fosters student engagement and collaboration.  
Personalized feedback and support can also be implemented in digital teaching. It can be delivered through  
various means such as audio or video recordings, written comments, or rubrics (Ryan et al., 2019). This approach  
enables educators to provide tailored feedback that can help students understand their strengths and areas for  
improvement. Additionally, providing students with personalized support through one-on-one meetings or  
virtual office hours can help build a sense of community and support in digital learning environments (Hsu et  
al., 2022).  
Finally, professional development programs that focus on the development of communication and support skills  
can also be effective in addressing challenges in digital teaching. These programs can provide educators with  
the necessary skills and knowledge to effectively communicate with and support students in online learning  
environments (Meyer, Kleinknecht & Richter, 2023). By emphasizing the importance of effective  
communication and support in digital teaching, professional development programs can help educators create  
engaging and supportive learning environments that foster student success.  
Assessment and Feedback  
Academics can adopt various strategies to promote student engagement in digital teaching. For instance, they  
can incorporate interactive tools, such as virtual simulations and gamification, into their online courses to  
increase student participation and motivation (Diaz & Estoque-Loñez, 2024). They can also leverage social  
media platforms and discussion forums to facilitate student interactions and create a sense of community in the  
online classroom (Hrastinski et al., 2020).  
Regular and timely feedback can be helpful in digital teaching. Parmigiani et al. (2024) noted that students often  
feel disconnected in online learning environments, and providing regular feedback can help bridge this gap. This  
feedback can take many forms, including comments on assignments, discussion board posts, and emails.  
Additionally, instructors can use video feedback to create a more personalized and engaging experience for  
students. Digital courses should include multiple opportunities for feedback throughout the course, such as  
formative assessments and peer review activities. This allows students to receive timely feedback on their  
progress and adjust their learning accordingly.  
Assessment and academic integrity discussions have rapidly evolved with the rise of generative AI. A 2025  
systematic review maps how AI complicates integrity and calls for principle‑based policy, assessment redesign,  
and staff–student AI literacy rather than reliance on detection tools alone (Bittle & El-Gayar, 2025). Related  
analyses caution that detection technologies are imperfect and should be complemented by authentic assessment  
strategies. In open and distance education, AI is argued to offer opportunities to improve access and quality,  
though evidence at scale remains mixed, suggesting a cautious, systems‑oriented adoption (Xiao et al., 2024).  
Page 7595  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
Future Directions  
Continued professional development is crucial for academicians to adapt to evolving digital teaching  
technologies and methods (Bozkurt et al., 2020). Institutions need to continue to provide professional  
development opportunities for academicians to keep pace with the rapidly evolving digital teaching landscape.  
Collaboration and sharing can also help academicians share best practices and develop new strategies for  
effective digital teaching (Amemasor et al., 2025). Academicians can collaborate and share best practices and  
resources with their colleagues to improve the quality of online teaching.  
Integration of emerging technologies, such as virtual and augmented reality, can provide new opportunities for  
engagement and learning in digital teaching environments (Chen et al., 2015). Institutions need to explore and  
integrate emerging technologies, such as virtual reality and artificial intelligence, to enhance the online learning  
experience.  
Digital teaching presents significant challenges for academicians, but with the right strategies and support, these  
challenges can be overcome. Professional development, course design, communication and support, and  
assessment and feedback are key strategies for addressing these challenges. Continued collaboration and  
integration of emerging technologies are important future directions for improving digital teaching.  
Relevance to Government Policy  
In Malaysia, the policy landscape has shifted with the Dasar Pendidikan Digital by the Ministry of Education  
Malaysia (2023) detailing objectives, six pillars, and initiatives to develop digitally competent educators,  
improve infrastructure, and strengthen partnerships. At the national level, the Malaysia Digital Economy  
Blueprint (MyDIGITAL) frames digital inclusion—such as broadband as basic infrastructure—and a  
whole‑of‑nation approach to bridging the digital divide (Economic Planning Unit, 2021). Recent policy analysis  
indicates that implementation gaps persist, especially in rural areas, and recommends targeted capacity‑building  
and infrastructure acceleration to close equity gaps (Ismail, 2025).  
One of the key areas of focus for RMK-12 is the digital transformation of Malaysia's education system. The plan  
aims to accelerate the adoption of digital teaching and learning technologies to enhance the quality of education  
and ensure equal access to education for all Malaysians. The plan proposes several initiatives to facilitate the  
adoption of digital technologies in education and to ensure that all Malaysians have access to quality education  
regardless of their socio-economic background. One of the initiatives by the government is the Digital Education  
Transformation (DET) initiative, which focuses on improving the quality of teaching and learning through digital  
technologies. DET aims to provide a comprehensive digital platform for teachers and students to access quality  
learning materials and resources, collaborate with peers and educators, and receive personalized feedback and  
assessments. Therefore, this study will help to identify the challenges and strategies to achieve this aspiration.  
This study is also directly related to SDG4, which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and  
promote lifelong learning opportunities for all. By implementing digital teaching and learning initiatives, the  
Malaysian government is working towards providing access to quality education for all, regardless of geographic  
location or socio-economic background. The focus on enhancing the quality of teaching and learning, as well as  
promoting innovation in education through the use of technology, is in line with the goals of SDG4. Furthermore,  
by ensuring that students are equipped with the necessary digital skills and competencies, the government is also  
contributing towards achieving SDG4's target of ensuring that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills  
needed to promote sustainable development.  
Table 1. Summary of Challenges, Strategies, and Future Directions in Digital Teaching Innovations  
Domain  
Challenges  
Strategies  
Future Directions  
Technical  
Unstable internet, device Low‑bandwidth platforms; Broadband expansion; affordable  
shortages, digital divide offline resources; device connectivity policies; PPPs; policy  
(Dong et al., 2021; Ministry loan schemes; IT support alignment via MyDIGITAL and  
Page 7596  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
of Education Malaysia, (Akmal et al., 2022; DPD (Economic Planning Unit,  
2023; Deng & El Hag, Bozkurt et al., 2020; 2021; Ministry of Education  
2024).  
Rostami et al., 2021)  
Malaysia, 2023; Ismail, 2025)  
Pedagogical Lack of digital pedagogy Continuous  
PD; Centres of excellence; AI‑enabled  
skills;  
adoption;  
limited  
reliance  
UDL mentoring;  
inclusive teaching  
assistants;  
adaptive  
on course design; authentic learning;  
institution‑wide  
traditional exams (Afonso et assessment;  
al., 2025; Hodges et al., integration  
curricular accessibility  
responsibility  
of  
digital (EDUCAUSE, 2025; Lomellini et  
2020; Means, 2010)  
competence (Bozkurt et al., al., 2025; UNESCO, 2023)  
2020; Correia et al., 2025;  
Ma & Ismail, 2025)  
Engagement Online isolation; low social Interactive LMS; peer VR/AR/XR immersive learning;  
presence; lack of projects; breakout rooms; predictive analytics; AI‑driven  
collaboration (Fernandes et social  
al., 2014; Hrastinski et al., deliberate  
2020; Bozkurt et al., 2020)  
media  
tools; personalisation; emphasise social  
presence effects (Tao et al., 2025;  
community‑building Marougkas et al., 2024; Mykota,  
(Austin & Kortemeyer, 2025)  
2022; Martin et al., 2024;  
Oyarzun et al., 2023)  
Assessment Academic integrity issues; Formative  
& Feedback limited feedback assessments;  
&
peer Universal accessibility standards;  
AI‑integrated academic integrity  
approaches; institutional QA rubrics;  
personalisation (Lee & Choi, multimodal/video  
2021; Bond et al., 2024; feedback;  
accessible cautious,  
systems‑oriented  
AI  
Guruge et al., 2025)  
rubrics; AI literacy for staff adoption (Ahmed et al., 2022;  
and students (Li & Lalani, UNESCO, 2023; Xiao et al, 2024)  
2020; Oyarzun et al., 2023;  
Wu & Chen, 2021)  
Building upon the literature, four thematic domains—technical, pedagogical, engagement, and assessment—  
emerge as critical in shaping equity and accessibility in digital teaching. Each domain presents unique  
challenges, but the literature also offers actionable strategies and forward-looking directions. Table 1 synthesizes  
findings across these domains, highlighting how immediate interventions (e.g., professional development, low-  
bandwidth platforms, interactive LMS tools) address short-term issues, while systemic reforms (e.g., broadband  
expansion, AI-integrated learning, institutional QA standards) ensure long-term sustainability. This synthesis  
underscores the importance of aligning institutional practices with Malaysia’s RMK-12 and MyDIGITAL  
initiatives and global frameworks such as SDG4.  
Finally, beyond access, recent synthesis work on digital competence highlights the need to integrate digital  
competence across curricula and strengthen institutional support structures for educators and students, pointing  
to future research on organisational infrastructure and leadership (Ma & Ismail, 2025).  
Conceptual Framework  
The conceptual framework (Figure 1) consolidates findings from the literature review into a structured flow. The  
framework illustrates how four challenge domains—Technical, Pedagogical, Engagement, and Assessment—  
feed into institutional strategies (Professional Development, Inclusive Course Design, Communication and  
Support, and Accessible Assessment). These strategies, in turn, drive outcomes of Equity and Accessibility in  
digital teaching, while aligning with policy imperatives such as Malaysia’s RMK-12 and the UN Sustainable  
Development Goal 4 (SDG4).  
Page 7597  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework for Equity and Accessibility in Digital Teaching Innovations  
METHODOLOGY  
The research aims to investigate the challenges, the strategies, and the future directions of the equity and  
accessibility considerations in digital teaching innovations. Little is known about this topic, and as such, we will  
use a qualitative research design to collect the data. We will use focus group discussions to unearth the  
information from the respondents to answer the research questions.  
A focus group consists of bringing people from a homogeneous background together into a focused discussion,  
typically involving six to ten participants in an open discussion led by a moderator. For this study, we intend to  
conduct two focus groups. Each group will consist of between eight to ten participants with one moderator.  
Sampling Techniques  
The researchers will use purposive or judgemental sampling to ensure they have a range of participants from the  
lecturers. The lists of possible respondents will be developed in consultation with an authorized person from the  
participating university. We will approach the potential participants with a letter of invitation, which outlines  
the goals of the study. The individuals who answered positively will be contacted and invited to the focus group  
sessions. The inclusion and exclusion criteria of the participants are as follows:  
1. The participant must be a permanent lecturer from the participating university.  
2. The participant must already have served the university for at least 5 years.  
The Instruments  
The instruments for data collection are the semi-structured focus group interview questions that will be  
developed by the researchers based on the literature. The semi-structured focus group interview guide will help  
the moderator to focus the discussions during the focus group based on the study’s objectives. The guide begins  
with the introduction, which informs participants of the purpose of the study and their right to get a copy of the  
report and to withdraw from the study at any time without penalty. It also stated that all interviewees will be de-  
identified, except if the interviewees request identification. The questions are open-ended in nature and are  
grouped together based on similar concepts and logical occurrence.  
The researchers will pre-test the focus group interview guide to ensure the questions are understood by the  
respondents and to test the technology that we used to record the interviews. Pre-test helped us to refine our data  
collection plans with respect to both content and procedures to follow (Yin, 2003). The pre-test will be carried  
Page 7598  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
out with two senior lecturers from each university; they will be excluded from the study population. They must  
have sufficient experience to confirm the content validity of the questions in the guide. The selection of the  
participants for the pre-test is based on their occupation, working experience, convenience of access and  
geographic proximity.  
The Data Collection  
The focus group discussions will be conducted through face to face for better interactions between the  
participants and moderators to gain more in-depth information. The participants will be asked to sign a consent  
form before the focus group sessions start. The sessions will be recorded using an audio-visual recorder with the  
participants’ permission; the recordings will later be transcribed by the researchers. The audio recording will be  
transcribed using Google Voice and NVivo to analyse the results. From the results, the researchers will develop  
the framework for the equity and accessibility considerations in digital teaching innovations.  
Data Analysis  
Data analysis and interpretation of the qualitative data, that is, through the use of thematic content analysis,  
begins with coding. Coding is `the process of defining what the data are about’ (Charmaz, 2006). A well-  
established coding method was used to guide the coding of the interviews and documents. To enhance the  
meaning and capture the emotion, thematic analysis of transcripts will be conducted, and participants’ answers  
will be quoted in the findings.  
To ensure the reliability of the findings, the findings from the two focus groups will be compared and cross-case  
analysis will be done. To ensure validity, unexpected findings from the text will be declared and compared with  
existing literature.  
To conclude, the data analysis consists of analysing individual focus groups and is then followed by cross-case  
analysis. This reflects triangulation, which ensures the reliability and increases the validity of the analysis of the  
findings.  
CONCLUSION  
This paper is a part of a bigger study that will be undertaken by the researchers. The researchers believe the  
study can have an impact on society by improving the quality of education and the learning experience for  
students. By addressing the challenges faced by academicians in digital teaching, the study can help to enhance  
student engagement, motivation, and achievement in online learning environments. This can, in turn, improve  
the overall education outcomes for students and contribute to a more educated and skilled workforce in society.  
The study may also have an impact on the economy by promoting the adoption of digital technologies in  
education. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the shift towards digital teaching, and the study's findings  
and strategies can help academic institutions to effectively incorporate digital technologies into their teaching  
practices. This can result in cost savings for academic institutions and can provide greater access to education  
for learners, regardless of their geographic location. Additionally, the increased adoption of digital technologies  
in education can help to prepare students for a rapidly changing workforce and contribute to the growth of the  
digital economy.  
In addition, the study may have an impact on the nation by improving the quality of education and contributing  
to the development of a skilled workforce. By addressing the challenges faced by academicians in digital  
teaching, the study can help academic institutions to effectively deliver education, even in times of crisis such  
as the COVID-19 pandemic. This can ensure the continuity of education and contribute to the development of a  
knowledgeable and skilled population that can drive the economic growth of the nation. Additionally, the study's  
strategies for addressing challenges in digital teaching can contribute to the development of a robust and resilient  
education system that can adapt to changing circumstances and support the nation's long-term development  
goals.  
Page 7599  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
Equity and accessibility in digital teaching innovations may be extremely important in advancing the Sustainable  
Development Goal (SDG) of "Quality Education," which focuses on guaranteeing inclusive and equitable quality  
education and encouraging lifelong learning opportunities for everyone. SDG 4 may benefit greatly from these  
innovations. It is anticipated that equality and accessibility will have a significant impact on digital teaching  
innovation with respect to SDG 4, fostering inclusive education, lowering educational inequalities, empowering  
educators and students, addressing digital divides, and advancing lifelong learning.  
In conclusion, achieving SDG 4 depends on taking fairness and accessibility into account while developing  
innovative digital teaching strategies. Setting these factors in order of importance will help us build an inclusive,  
equitable, and adaptable educational ecosystem that will provide possibilities for lifelong learning and guarantee  
high-quality education for all students. The researchers may strive toward a more accessible, equitable, and  
sustainable educational environment in accordance with SDG 4 goals by incorporating these approaches.  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  
The authors would like to acknowledge and extend special gratitude to the Universiti Teknologi MARA  
Cawangan Kedah, who granted the Matching Grant Scheme for this project.  
REFERENCES  
1. Afonso, A., Morgado, L., Carvalho, I. C., & Spilker, M. J. (2025). Facing challenges in higher education:  
Enhancing accessibility and inclusion through flexible learning design. Education Sciences, 15(8), 1013.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15081013  
2. Ahmed Alnagrat, A. J., Che Ismail, R., Syed Idrus, S. Z., Abukhatowah, U. A., & Gopalan, V. (2022).  
Impact of digitalisation strategy in higher education: Technologies and new opportunities. International  
Journal of Business and Technopreneurship, 12(1), 79–94.  
3. Akmal, M., Azevedo, J. P. W., Cobo Romani, J. C., Gilberto Sanzana, A. G., Hasan, A., & Muñoz-Najar,  
A. (2022). Remote learning during COVID-19: Lessons from today, principles for tomorrow. World Bank.  
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/160271637074230077  
4. Akpen, C., Asaolu, S., Atobatele, S., Okagbue, H., & Sampson, S. (2024). Impact of online learning on  
students’ performance and engagement:  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00253-0  
A
systematic review. Discover Education.  
5. Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating e-learning systems success: An empirical study.  
Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004  
6. Al-Maqbali, A.H. & Al-Shamsi, A. (2023). Assessment Strategies in Online Learning Environments  
During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Oman. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice (5):8  
7. AlRawi, J. M., & AlKahtani, M. A. (2021). Universal design for learning for educating students with  
intellectual disabilities: A systematic review. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 68(6),  
800–808. https://doi.org/10.1080/20473869.2021.1900505  
8. Amemasor, S. K., Oppong, S. O., Ghansah, B., Benuwa, B.-B., & Essel, D. D. (2025). A systematic  
review on the impact of teacher professional development on digital instructional integration and  
teaching practices. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1541031. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1541031  
9. Austin, A., & Kortemeyer, G. (2022). A systematic approach to quality online course design and  
development. EDUCAUSE Review.  
10. Ayasrah, M. N., Al-Masa’deh, M. M., Al-Rousan, A. H., & Khasawneh, M. A. S. (2023). Digital learning  
for students with disabilities. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 15(1), 43–50.  
https://doi.org/10.18844/wjet.v15i1.8203  
11. Bittle, K., & El-Gayar, O. (2025). Generative AI and academic integrity in higher education: Asystematic  
review and research agenda. Information, 16, 296. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16040296  
12. Bond, M., Khosravi, H., De Laat, M., Bergdahl, N., Negrea, V., Oxley, E., Pham, P., Chong, S. W., …  
Siemens, G. (2024). A meta systematic review of artificial intelligence in higher education: A call for  
increased ethics, collaboration, and rigour. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher  
Education, 21, 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00436-z  
13. Bozkurt, A., Jung, I., Xiao, J., Vladimirschi, V., Schuwer, R., Egorov, G., … Paskevicius, M. (2020). A  
Page 7600  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
global outlook to the interruption of education due to COVID-19 pandemic: Navigating in a time of  
uncertainty  
and  
crisis.  
Asian  
Journal  
of  
Distance  
Education,  
15(1),  
1–126.  
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3878571  
14. Breen, P. (2018). Developing educators for the digital age: A framework for capturing knowledge in  
action. University of Westminster Press. https://doi.org/10.16997/book13  
15. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage.  
16. Chen, B., Seilhamer, R., Bennett, L., & Bauer, S. (2015). Students’ mobile learning practices in higher  
education: A multi-year study. EDUCAUSE Review, 7(3), 225–235.  
17. Chima, A. E., Onyebuchi, N. C., & Idowu, S. A. (2024). Online learning and community engagement:  
Strategies for promoting inclusivity and collaboration in education. World Journal ofAdvanced Research  
and Reviews, 21(3), 232–239. https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2024.21.3.0693  
18. Choi-Lundberg, D. L., Butler-Henderson, K., Harman, K., & Crawford, J. (2023). A systematic review  
of digital innovations in technology-enhanced learning designs in higher education. Australasian Journal  
of Educational Technology, 39(3), 133–162. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7615  
19. Coleman, V. (2021). Digital divide in UK education during COVID-19 pandemic: Literature review  
(Cambridge Assessment Research Report). Cambridge Assessment.  
20. Correia, N., Almeida, T., Friães, R., & Cardoso, A. (2025). Bridging pedagogy, curriculum, and  
assessment in digital education: Ensuring a constructive alignment. Social Inclusion, 13, Article 9473.  
https://doi.org/10.17645/si.9473  
21. Dawadi, S., Goshtasbpour, F., & Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2024). Equitable access to higher education  
learning and assessment: Perspectives from low-resource contexts. Journal of Interactive Media in  
Education, 1(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.832  
22. Deng, X., & El Hag, S. (2024). Digital Inequality and Two Levels of the Digital Divide in Online  
Learning: A Mixed Methods Study of Underserved College Students. Journal of Information Systems  
Education, 35(3), 377-389. https://doi.org/10.62273/SSIF6302  
23. Díaz, A. F., & Estoque-Loñez, H. (2024). A meta-analysis on the effectiveness of gamification on student  
learning achievement. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology,  
12(5), 1236–1253. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.4185  
24. Dong, C., Cao, S., & Zhang, X. (2021). Effects of online education on college students’ learning: A meta-  
analysis.  
Journal  
of  
Educational  
Computing  
Research,  
59(1),  
107–126.  
https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120954489  
25. Dong, C., Cao, S., & Zhu, C. (2021). Internet access and online learning engagement during the COVID-  
19 pandemic: Evidence from a survey in China. Children and Youth Services Review, 120, 105866.  
26. Economic Planning Unit. (2021). Twelfth Malaysia Plan 2021–2025: Aprosperous, inclusive, sustainable  
Malaysia. Prime Minister’s Department.  
27. Eden, J., Rogers, R., & Hoffman, N. (2022). Impacting student satisfaction, engagement and motivation  
in online and traditional classrooms. KOME. https://doi.org/10.17646/kome.75672.91  
28. EDUCAUSE. (2025). 2025 EDUCAUSE Horizon Report: Teaching and learning edition. EDUCAUSE.  
https://library.educause.edu/resources/2025/5/2025-educause-horizon-report-teaching-and-learning-  
edition  
29. Fernandes, R., Pacios, J., & Resende, M. (2014). Student engagement in online learning: A review of the  
literature. In Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Learning (pp. 177–185).  
30. Fuentes, S., Newton, M., & Reed, J. (2021). Designing online learning to increase student engagement.  
Instructional Modules for Professional Learning Responding to Opportunities and Valuing Educators  
(IMPROVE), 30. https://digitalcommons.gardner-webb.edu/improve/30  
31. Geletu, G. M. (2023). The effects of pedagogical mentoring and coaching on teachers’ professional  
development practices and students’ learning engagements. Education 3–13, 1–17.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2023.2293209  
32. Guruge, D. B., Kadel, R., Shailendra, S., & Sharma, A. (2025). Building academic integrity: Evaluating  
the effectiveness of a new framework to address and prevent contract cheating. Societies, 15(1), 11.  
https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15010011  
33. Haarala-Muhonen, A., Myyry, L., Pyörälä, E., Kallunki, V., Anttila, H., Katajavuori, N., Kinnunen, P., &  
Tuononen, T. (2023). The impact of pedagogical and ICT training in teachers’ approaches to online  
teaching and use of digital tools. Frontiers in Education, 8, Article 1223665.  
Page 7601  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1223665  
34. Hidayat Ali, H., Bashir, R., Ali Raza, A., Ejaz, H., Shabir, R., & Aftab, M. J. (2024). Role of inclusive  
education in promoting equity in education: Teachers’ perspectives. Qualitative Research, 24(1), 133–  
151.  
35. Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency  
remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-  
difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning  
36. Hollister, B., Nair, P., Hill-Lindsay, S., & Chukoskie, L. (2022). Engagement in online learning: Student  
attitudes and behavior during COVID-19. Frontiers in Education, 7, 851019.  
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.851019  
37. Hrastinski, S., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Stenbom, S. (2020). Engaging students through social media:  
Evidence-based practices in higher education. EDUCAUSE Review, 1–18.  
38. Hsu, J. L., Chen, D. Y., Cannon, J. G., & Rudd, J. A. (2022). Student motivations and barriers toward  
online and in-person office hours in STEM courses. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 21(4), ar68.  
39. Ismail, R. A. M. (2025). Bridging the digital divide in Malaysian education. Penang Institute.  
40. Kemp,  
https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2025-malaysia  
41. Lee, Y. T., & Choi, J. (2021). Evaluation of digital feedback tools for improving students’ academic  
writing: case study in Hong Kong. Computers Education, 159, 104037.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104037  
S.  
(2025,  
March  
3).  
Digital  
2025:  
Malaysia.  
DataReportal.  
A
&
42. Li, C., & Lalani, F. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic has changed education forever. This is how. World  
Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/coronavirus-education-global-covid19-  
online-digital-learning  
43. Lomellini, A., Lowenthal, P. R., Snelson, C., & Trespalacios, J. H. (2025). Accessible and inclusive  
online learning in higher education: Areview of the literature. Journal of Computing in Higher Education,  
37, 1306–1329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-024-09424-2  
44. Ma, H., & Ismail, L. (2025). Bibliometric analysis and systematic review of digital competence in  
education. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12, 185. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-  
025-04401-1  
45. Marougkas, A., Troussas, C., Krouska, A., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2024). How personalized and effective  
is immersive virtual reality in education? A systematic literature review for the last decade. Multimedia  
Tools and Applications, 83, 18185–18233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-023-15986-7  
46. Martin, F., Swapna, K., Ritzhaupt, A., & Polly, D. (2024). Bichronous online learning: Perspectives, best  
practices, benefits, and challenges from award-winning online instructors. Online Learning, 28(2), 1–27.  
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v28i2.3945  
47. Meyer, A., Kleinknecht, M., & Richter, D. (2023). What makes online professional development effective?  
The effect of quality characteristics on teachers’ satisfaction and changes in their professional practices.  
Computers & Education, 200, 104805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104805  
48. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2023). Digital education policy. Educational Resources and  
Technology Division, Ministry of Education Malaysia.  
49. Moorhouse, B.L., Wong, K.M. (2022). Blending asynchronous and synchronous digital technologies and  
instructional approaches to facilitate remote learning. J. Comput. Educ. 9, 51–70.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-021-00195-8  
50. Mykota, D. (2025). A Meta-Analysis of Social Presence in Higher Education Online  
Environments. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education Revue Internationale Du E-  
Learning Et La Formation à Distance, 40(1). https://doi.org/10.55667/10.55667/ijede.2025.v40.i1.1351  
51. Oyarzun, B., & Martin, F. (2023). A systematic review of research on online learner collaboration from  
2012–21: Collaboration technologies, design, facilitation, and outcomes. Online Learning, 27(1), 71–  
106. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i1.3407  
52. Parmigiani, D., Nicchia, E., Murgia, E., & Ingersoll, M. (2024). Formative assessment in higher  
education: An exploratory study within programs for professionals in education. Frontiers in Education,  
9, 1366215. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1366215  
53. Resta, P., & Laferrière, T. (2008). Issues and challenges related to digital equity. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek  
(Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 765–  
Page 7602  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue X October 2025  
778). Springer.  
54. Ryan, T., Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2019). Feedback modes matter: Comparing student perceptions  
of audio, video, and text feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(3), 365–380.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1533711  
55. Sims, S., Fletcher-Wood, H., O’Mara-Eves, A., Cottingham, S., Stansfield, C., Goodrich, J., Van  
Herwegen, J., & Anders, J. (2023). Effective Teacher Professional Development: New Theory and a  
Meta-Analytic  
Test.  
Review  
of  
Educational  
Research,  
95(2),  
213-254.  
https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543231217480 (Original work published 2025)  
56. Tao, L., Cukurova, M., & Song, Y. (2025). Learning analytics in immersive virtual learning environments:  
A systematic literature review. Smart Learning Environments, 12, 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-  
025-00370-1  
57. UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO.  
https://doi.org/10.54675/4jx4-xg23  
58. Wu, Y., & Chen, D. (2021). Effects of video feedback on students’ learning in online higher education.  
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(6), 1589–1602. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12573  
59. Xiao, J., Liu, S., & Zhu, Y. (2024). Opportunities and challenges of AI in open and distance education.  
International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 25(1), 1–23.  
https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v25i1.7577  
60. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Sage.  
Page 7603  
www.rsisinternational.org